ArticleHealth policy OPEN2023
Implicit factors influencing the HTA deliberative processes in 5 European countries: results from a mixed-methods research.
Article in Health policy OPEN, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Getting fairer over time? Assessing changes in health technology funding processes using the accountability for reasonableness (A4R) framework.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Ethical Considerations in Health Technology Assessment for Precision Medicine: A Delphi Study in a Greek Setting.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- The RELIANT checklist: a novel approach to revealing implicit factors in HTA deliberations.Health policy OPEN · 2026Article
- Introduction of Biopharmaceuticals in Europe: A Cross-Sectional Study of Early Diffusion Patterns and Data Availability.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2025Article
- Avoiding Error and Finding the Right Balance in European Health Technology Assessments: Insights Generated by the European Access Academy.Journal of market access & health policy · 2025Article
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
Background: Health technology assessment (HTA) bodies across Europe rely on explicit factors for decision making. However, additional undefined factors play a role. This mixed-methods research aimed to identify the implicit factors involved in HTA deliberative processes in five European countries, and to analyze their impact on decision making. Methods: Between February and May 2021, semi-structured interviews (n = 20) were conducted with HTA experts of three different profiles (chair, advisor, and committee member) from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom. The degree of influence of a set of implicit factors and attributes that play a role in the HTA deliberative process, as previously identified in a systematic literature review, was scored by the experts. Experts were also asked to make recommendations on ways of improving the deliberative process. A qualitative analysis and descriptive statistics of quantitative variables are reported. Results: Most (18/20) experts concurred that implicit factors play a role in the HTA deliberative process. Recommendations for improving the process fell into three categories: transparency, methodology improvement, and stakeholder involvement. The results suggest a need for 1) increased external involvement HTA and 2) development of a methodology to mitigate the influence of implicit factors in the deliberative process. This could be achieved by updating the current frameworks to acknowledge these implicit factors and by developing methods to address them.
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.