Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36815310›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2023

Health technology assessment 2025 and beyond: lifecycle approaches to promote engagement and efficiency in health technology assessment.

Rebecca Trowman, Antonio Migliore, Daniel A Ollendorf

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of technology assessment in health care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Action Plan to Better Approximate Reality in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026
    Article
  2. Regulatory and HTA framework for herbal medicines in Indonesia.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Ethical challenges for Health Technology Assessment (HTA) in the evolving evidence landscape.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Rebecca TrowmanHealth Technology Assessment International (HTAi), Perth, WA, Australia.
Antonio MiglioreHealth Technology Assessment International (HTAi), Edmonton, AB, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1984-0803
Daniel A OllendorfTufts Medical Center, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6016-8129

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lifecycle considerations have always been part of health technology assessment (HTA). However, the concept of taking a fuller, more holistic "lifecycle approach" is gaining interest in the HTA community. The 2022 HTAi Global Policy Forum (GPF) discussed how adopting a lifecycle approach could promote stakeholder engagement and robust evidence generation, and whether it could enhance information sharing and transparency across stakeholder groups. This article summarizes the discussions held at the 2022 HTAi GPF and subsequent HTAi Annual Meeting panel session that debated some of the key challenges and opportunities, with particular focus on the pre- and postmarket and disinvestment phase activities. Core themes and recommendations identified that collaboration and patient involvement are happening but still needs to be strengthened, and moving to disease-based approaches may help, although individual contexts still need to be considered. Appropriately developed and mandated core outcome sets may help with information sharing and efficiency in all lifecycle activities. Further, methods for the appropriate use of big data and digital data collection should be developed and driven by the HTA community. The value of lifecycle activities should be reviewed; in particular, scientific advice appears valuable, but the magnitude of effect is somewhat unknown due to the challenges around the confidential nature of these activities. Not all lifecycle activities can be conducted for every technology, and while there is a move away from disinvestment phase activities, more structured prioritization criteria are required. This article ends with suggested next steps to bring forward some of the priority recommendations.

Indexed as

Policy MakingTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalHumansPatient ParticipationPolicyStakeholder Participationcollaborationhealth policyhealth technology assessmentstakeholder involvementtechnology lifecycletransparency

Identifiers

PMID36815310
PMCPMC11574536

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.