Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32772012›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of health policy and management2021

Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for HTA Around the Globe: Exploring the Next Frontiers of HTA and Best Practices Comment on "Use of Evidence-informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe".

Unni Gopinathan, Trygve Ottersen, Pascale-Renée Cyr, Kalipso Chalkidou

Abstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of health policy and management, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Unni GopinathanDivision for Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-7145-1461
Trygve OttersenDivision for Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Pascale-Renée CyrDepartment of Community Medicine and Global Health, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Kalipso ChalkidouGlobal Health Development Group, Imperial College London School of Public Health, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7087-2803

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This comment reflects on an article by Oortwijn, Jansen, and Baltussen about the use and features of 'evidence-informed deliberative processes' (EDPs) among health technology assessment (HTA) agencies around the world and the need for more guidance. First, we highlight procedural aspects that are relevant across key steps of EDP, focusing on conflict of interest, the different roles of stakeholders throughout a HTA and public justification of decisions. Second, we discuss new knowledge and models needed to maximize the value of deliberative processes at the expanding frontiers of HTA, paying special attention to when HTA is applied in primary care, employed for public health interventions, and is produced through international collaboration.

Indexed as

Public HealthTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalHumansDecision-MakingDeliberative ProcessesHealth PolicyHealth Technology AssessmentPriority Setting

Identifiers

PMID32772012
PMCPMC8167266

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.