Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40236923›Full record

ArticleHealth policy OPEN2025

The global landscape of country-level health technology assessment processes: A survey among 104 countries.

Andrew J Mirelman, Kratu Goel, Tessa Tan-Torres Edejer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health policy OPEN, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Health technology assessment in Eastern Europe and Central Asia: an updated SWOT analysis.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

3 authors.

Andrew J MirelmanDepartment of Health Financing and Economics, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Kratu GoelDepartment of Health Financing and Economics, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Tessa Tan-Torres EdejerDepartment of Health Financing and Economics, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To make progress towards universal health coverage (UHC), countries need to be able to develop and implement evidence-informed and inclusive processes for decision-making to inform what services are provided and purchased. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) processes are an established mechanism to support evidence-informed decision-making in the health sector. To assess the practice of HTA in countries, WHO conducted a global survey that explores the status of HTA. The survey is the largest source of information in terms of number of countries for describing global HTA status. The final sample analysed in this paper is the 104 countries (82% or 104/127) that responded "yes" to the question of having a systematic, formal health decision-making process at the national level. The results show that while many countries have HTA bodies in place, these serve different functions. While there are more established processes in higher income country groups, even those show room for improvement in areas such as social participation and appeals. Lack of awareness of the importance of HTA and institutionalization were the top two barriers to HTA utilization. There is further progress that needs to be made in HTA globally. Countries need to build on available guidance to ensure the appropriate elements are in place for sustainable country decision-making processes and develop more understanding of how they vary across settings.

Indexed as

Health technology assessmentInstitutionalizationPriority-setting

Identifiers

PMID40236923
PMCPMC11999493

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.