Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37973549›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2023

Dynamic HTA for digital health solutions: opportunities and challenges for patient-centered evaluation.

Jan B Brönneke, Annika Herr, Simon Reif, Ariel D Stern

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 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Co-Creation in the Development of Digital Therapeutics: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. 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

4 authors.

Jan B BrönnekeHealth Innovation Hub of the German Federal Ministry of Health, Berlin, Germany.
Annika HerrLeibniz University Hannover, Hannover, Germany.
Simon ReifZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, Mannheim, Germany.
Ariel D SternHarvard Business School, Health Innovation Hub of the German Federal Ministry of Health, Hasso Plattner Institute, Digital Health Cluster, Harvard-MIT Center for Regulatory Science, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3586-1041

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesGermany's 2019 Digital Healthcare Act (Digitale-Versorgung-Gesetz, or DVG) created a number of opportunities for the digital transformation of the healthcare delivery system. Key among these was the creation of a reimbursement pathway for patient-centered digital health applications (digitale Gesundheitsanwendungen, or DiGA). Worldwide, this is the first structured pathway for "prescribable" health applications at scale. As of October 10, 2023, 49 DiGA were listed in the official directory maintained by Germany's Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM); these are prescribable by physicians and psychotherapists and reimbursed by the German statutory health insurance system for all its 73 million beneficiaries. Looking ahead, a major challenge facing DiGA manufacturers will be the generation of the evidence required for ongoing price negotiations and reimbursement. Current health technology assessment (HTA) methods will need to be adapted for DiGA.

methodsWe describe the core issues that distinguish HTA in this setting: (i) explicit allowance for more flexible research designs, (ii) the nature of initial evidence generation, which can be delivered (in its final form) up to one year after becoming reimbursable, and (iii) the dynamic nature of both product development and product evaluation. We present the digital health applications in the German DiGA scheme as a case study and highlight the role of RWE in the successful evaluation of DiGA on an ongoing basis.

resultsWhen a DiGA is likely to be updated and assessed regularly, full-scale RCTs are infeasible; we therefore make the case for using real-world data and real-world evidence (RWE) for

conclusionsContinous evaluation using RWD is a regulatory innovation that can help improve the quality of DiGAs on the market.

Indexed as

National Health ProgramsTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalGermanyHumansPatient-Centered Carebiomedical technology assessmentdigital healthGermanygovernment regulationmedical economicsreimbursementsoftware

Identifiers

PMID37973549
PMCPMC11579678

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.