ArticleApplied health economics and health policy2026
Health Technology Assessment Guidelines and Recommendations Across European Union Countries and the United Kingdom in Rare Disease and Paediatric Populations.
Article in Applied health economics and health policy, 2026. 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.
- Ethical Considerations in Health Technology Assessment for Precision Medicine: A Delphi Study in a Greek Setting.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
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
Abstract
objectivesDue to limited clinical data, high uncertainty, and outcome variability, assessing therapies for paediatric and rare disease populations poses specific challenges, often requiring adjustments to standard health technology assessment (HTA) frameworks. This study examines how national HTA guidelines and recommendations across Europe reflect these demands, identifying methodological adaptations and country-specific disparities.
methodsHTA organisations across the 27 EU Member States and the UK were identified via INAHTA, EUnetHTA, and ISPOR reference listings. Publicly available documents were screened, and 29 relevant national guidelines were selected. A structured document analysis was performed using a predefined coding framework. Key terms were systematically searched, and content was categorised into thematic domains.
resultsAmong the 29 guidelines, 16 included references to rare disease populations, and 12 to paediatric populations. For paediatric populations, most references focused on quality-of-life measurement and proxy assessments. Adaptations for rare diseases recognised flexible cost-effectiveness thresholds (e.g. adjusted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios [ICERs] or gross domestic product [GDP]-based modifiers), tailored economic modelling, and acceptance of alternative data sources. However, significant variability was observed across countries, with no consistent pattern.
conclusionWhile several HTA bodies have introduced adjustments for paediatric and rare disease populations, guidance often remains limited and heterogeneous. The findings indicate that HTA guidelines and recommendations require further collaboration to properly define and account for the specific needs of these patients. Methodological shortcomings are mainly due to the nature of these diseases, where the limited data available are primarily from clinical practice and often lack comparative effectiveness evidence.
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.