SynthesisInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2025
Redefining value assessment and healthcare funding priorities for medicines: the journey to patient-centric decision making in APAC - a systematic literature review.
Synthesis in International journal of technology assessment in health care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study explored patient involvement in healthcare decision-making in the Asia Pacific region (APAC) by identifying roles and factors influencing differences between healthcare systems. Proposed recommendations to enhance patient engagement were made.
methodsThis systematic literature review was conducted using studies from Australia, China, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, and Thailand. Studies were included if they provided data on patient involvement in health technology assessment (HTA) and/or funding decisions for medicines. Extracted data were scored according to eleven parameters adapted from the National Health Council (NHC) rubric, which assessed the level of patient involvement in healthcare system decision-making.
resultsWe identified 159 records between 2018 and 2022, including methodology guidelines from Government websites. Most mentioned parameters were patient partnership, patient-reported outcome, and mechanism to incorporate patient input. Limited information was available on diversity and patient-centered data sources. Tools for collecting patient experience included quality-of-life questionnaires, focus groups, interviews, and surveys, with feedback options like structured templates, videos, and public sessions.Beyond input in assessment process, involvement of patients in decision-making phase has evolved within HTA bodies over time with considerable variation. Few APAC healthcare systems involve patients in the appraisal process as members of the recommendation or decision-making committee.
conclusionsThe findings indicate that while patient involvement in pharmaceutical reimbursement decisions exists, improvements are needed. Effective integration of patient input requires transparency, education, and resource planning. This study establishes a baseline to track progress and assess the long-term impact of patient involvement.
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.