ReviewHealth economics review2022
How innovation can be defined, evaluated and rewarded in health technology assessment.
Review in Health economics review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Domains and Methods of Medical Device Technology Evaluation: A Systematic Review.Public health reviews · 2024Pooled it
- An Indicator System for Evaluating Sci-Tech Innovation-Driven Improvement of China's Disease Diagnosis and Treatment Capacity.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
- Challenges and reforms in Spain's health technology assessment system: analysis of criteria influencing medicines' reimbursement decisions between 2019 and 2022 in Spain.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025Article
- The Pharmaceutical Innovativeness Index: Supporting Value-Based Economic Regulation of Innovative Medicines.Journal of market access & health policy · 2025Article
- Therapeutic innovation in oncology: What do you mean? Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent, L. Wittgenstein.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- A Framework for Considering the Role of the Public Sector in R&D of Health Technology.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2025Review
- Overcoming barriers to off-patent drug repurposing: a lifecycle-based policy solutions.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Health technology assessment and innovation: here to help or hinder?International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024Review
- New Anticancer Drugs: Reliably Assessing "Value" While Addressing High Prices.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- Exploring the landscape of health technology assessment in Iran: perspectives from stakeholders on needs, demand and supply.Health research policy and systems · 2024Review
- Criteria to define innovation in the field of medical devices: a Delphi approach.GMS health innovation and technologies · 2024Article
- The Value of New: Consideration of Product Novelty in Health Technology Assessments of Pharmaceuticals.Applied health economics and health policy · 2023Review
- Clinical Trial Authorisation: A Final Look Back to Better Appraise the New European Regulation.Reviews on recent clinical trials · 2023Article
- Value Insider Season 1 Episode 5: What Other Aspects of Value May Be Relevant? (Societal Impact) [Podcast].International journal of general medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhat constitutes innovation in health technologies can be defined and measured in a number of ways and it has been widely researched and published about. However, while many countries mention it as a criterion for pricing or reimbursement of health technologies, countries differ widely in how they define and operationalise it.
methodsWe performed a literature review, using a snowballing search. In this paper, we explore how innovation has been defined in the literature in relation to health technology assessment. We also describe how a selection of countries (England, France, Italy, Spain and Japan) take account of innovation in their health technology assessment frameworks and explore the key methodologies that can capture it as a dimension of value in a new health technology. We propose a way of coming to, and incorporating into health technology assessment systems, a definition of innovation for health technologies that is independent of other dimensions of value that they already account for in their systems, such as clinical benefit. We use Spain as an illustrative example of how innovation might be operationalised as a criterion for decision making in health technology assessment.
resultsThe countries analysed here can be divided into 2 groups with respect to how they define innovation. France, Japan and Italy use features such as severity, unmet need and therapeutic added value as indicators of the degree of innovation of a health technology, while England, Spain consider the degree of innovation as a separate and additional criterion from others. In the case of Spain, a notion of innovation might be constructed around concepts of `step-change', `convenience', `strength of evidence base' and `impact on future research & development'.
conclusionsIf innovation is to be used as operational criteria for adoption, pricing and reimbursement of health technologies, the concept must be clearly defined, and it ought to be independent from other value dimensions already captured in their health technology assessment systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.