Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37334665›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2023

Decision making for early surgical technology adoption into Canada's healthcare system: a scoping review of the decision-making criteria, challenges, and opportunities.

Haitham Shoman, Michael Tanzer

Abstract readScoping Review
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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Haitham ShomanVanier Scholar, Institute of Health Policy and Services Research, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3408-7020
Michael TanzerDepartment of Surgical and Interventional Sciences (Experimental Surgery), Faculty of Medicine, Montreal General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIn 2020, Canada spent 12.9 percent of its GDP on healthcare, of which 3 percent was on medical devices. Early adoption of innovative surgical devices is mostly driven by physicians and delaying adoption can deprive patients of important medical treatments. This study aimed to identify the criteria in Canada used to decide on the adoption of a surgical device and identify challenges and opportunities.

methodsThis scoping review was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis and PRISMA-ScR reporting guidelines. The search strategy included Canada's provinces, different surgical fields, and adoption. Embase, Medline, and provincial databases were searched. Grey literature was also searched. Data were analyzed by reporting the criteria that were used for technology adoption. Finally, a thematic analysis by subthematic categorization was conducted to arrange the criteria found.

resultsOverall, 155 studies were found. Seven were hospital-specific studies and 148 studies were from four provinces with publicly available Web sites for technology assessment committees (Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec). Seven main themes of criteria were identified: economic, hospital-specific, technology-specific, patients/public, clinical outcomes, policies and procedures, and physician specific. However, standardization and specific weighted criteria for decision making in the early adoption stage of novel technologies are lacking in Canada.

conclusionsSpecific criteria for decision making in the early adoption stage of novel surgical technologies are lacking. These criteria need to be identified, standardized, and applied in order to provide innovative, and the most effective healthcare to Canadians.

Indexed as

Decision MakingDelivery of Health CareAlbertaBritish ColumbiaCanadaHumansOntarioadoptionCanadadecisionhealthcare systemsurgical technology

Identifiers

PMID37334665
PMCPMC11569962

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.