ArticleBMC medical education2022
Talent cultivation in health technology assessment: an expert survey.
Article in BMC medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Competencies for health technology assessment professionals: a scoping review and content analysis.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026Article
- Bridging the educational gap: a pilot study of integrating patient-reported outcome into orthopedic residency training.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Optimization design of international talent training model based on big data system.Frontiers in psychology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealth technology assessment (HTA) has become essential in many countries over the past few years, and the demand for HTA professionals has increased in academia, governments, and industries. This study aimed to examine which courses are most important and which training activities are most helpful for the development of HTA proficiency as perceived by HTA experts.
methodsThe survey questionnaire was developed by literature review and expert opinion. Convenience sampling was used to survey HTA experts from the industrial sector, academic/research units, and government/independent assessment organizations using an online survey tool, SurveyCake. We collected respondents' demographic information and asked them to assess the importance of each course included in an HTA program on a 5-point Likert Scale (1 = least important; 5 = highly important). In addition, respondents were asked to assess the extent to which various activities are helpful for HTA proficiency development.
resultsA total of 158 domestic and overseas experts in HTA-related fields were invited to participate in the survey and 68 completed the questionnaire. Among the respondents, the majority were female (57.4%) and working in academia (44.1%). The mean ± standard deviation of respondents' age and number of years spent in HTA-related fields were 43.2 ± 11.0 years and 11.3 ± 9.9 years, respectively. The course that was rated the most important was "Pharmacoeconomics/Cost-effectiveness analysis" with a score of 4.8 ± 0.4 points, followed by "Health economics" at 4.7 ± 0.7 points. Moreover, internships at HTA-related institutions were perceived to be the most helpful training activity for HTA proficiency development.
conclusionsOur study findings provide a better understanding of the requirements for developing HTA proficiency and can serve as a reference for the modification of current HTA education and training programs.
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.