Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37732455›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2023

Using social media research in health technology assessment: stakeholder perspectives and scoping review.

Anke-Peggy Holtorf, Andriy Danyliv, Li-Ying Huang, Yvette Venable, Alissa Hanna, Annekatrin Krause, Miranda Pierre, Donna Walsh, Aline Silveira Silva, Sou-Hyun Lee and 1 more

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 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. Two decades of impact: lessons from the HTAi Patient and Citizen Involvement in HTA Interest Group.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
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

11 authors.

Anke-Peggy HoltorfPCIG at HTAi, Project Coordinator, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4638-5351
Andriy DanylivPatient Engagement, Novartis Pharma AG, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3382-5976
Li-Ying HuangDivision of Health Technology Assessment, Center for Drug Evaluation, Taiwan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5699-509X
Yvette VenablePatient Engagement, ICER, USA.
Alissa HannaPatient Engagement, Edwards Lifesciences, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7246-2843
Annekatrin KrausePatient Engagement, Novartis Pharma AG, Switzerland.
Miranda PierreScottish Medicines Consortium, Healthcare Improvement Scotland, Glasgow, Scotland.
Donna WalshEuropean Federation of Neurological Associations, Ireland.
Aline Silveira SilvaPatient Voices Network, Brazil/Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5571-9077
Sou-Hyun LeeNECA, South Korea.
T Joseph MattinglyCollege of Pharmacy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7786-5780

Funding

Health Technology Assessment international (Publication fee)Novartis (Financial Writing support)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this initiative was to examine collaboratively, in a multi-stakeholder team (health technology assessment (HTA) practitioners with patient involvement expertise, health technology industry, patient advocates, health policy experts, patient engagement experts), whether evidence generated through social media research (SMR) fills current information gaps relating to insights on specific aspects of patient experiences, preferences, or patient needs and delivers additional value to HTA.

methodsThe framing of the project was done in a co-creative, deliberative multi-stakeholder process. Challenge and refinement happened through discussions with 25 independent stakeholders from HTA bodies, industry, academia, and patient advocacy. For critical themes identified during the framing phase, scoping literature reviews were performed including the state of methods and examples for the use of SMR in HTA.

resultsThe framing and stakeholder discussions specified a set of expectations and requirements, and the scoping reviews revealed the current state of methods and usage of SMR in health-policy decision making.

conclusionsThe project concluded that SMR can contribute new, relevant evidence to HTA. It is however recommended to evolve the science through defining best practices when planning, conducting, and using SMR and to conduct multi-stakeholder pilot SMR projects to address questions relevant to current HTAs and to validate and improve the proposed practices.

Indexed as

Social MediaStakeholder ParticipationTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalDecision MakingHealth PolicyHumansPatient Participationhealth technology assessmentpatient-based evidencesocial media listeningsocial media researchstakeholder participation

Identifiers

PMID37732455
PMCPMC11570010

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.