Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38108142›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2023

Response to uncertainty management in regulatory and health technology assessment decision-making on drugs: guidance of the HTAi-DIA Working Group - author's reply.

Milou Amber Hogervorst, Rick Vreman, Inkatuuli Heikkinen, Wija Oortwijn

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

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Implementing a sandbox approach in health technology assessment: benefits and recommendations.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024
    Article
  4. Ethical challenges for Health Technology Assessment (HTA) in the evolving evidence landscape.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024
    Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Milou Amber HogervorstUtrecht University, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7528-574X
Rick VremanUtrecht University, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2076-322X
Inkatuuli HeikkinenMSD, Global Regulatory Policy, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-0916-4189
Wija OortwijnRadboud University Medical Centre, Department for Health Evidence, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4499-8602

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Decision MakingTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalPolicy MakingUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID38108142
PMCPMC10859829

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.