ArticleInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2025
Value-based health care frameworks for the health technology assessments of "omics" technologies: an international survey.
Article 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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Simulation-Based Diagnostic Stewardship Framework for Imaging Utilization in Primary Care: A Model Using 100 Common Clinical Conditions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- From Variant Interpretation to Biomarker Translation: Multi-omics Integration in Inherited Neuromuscular Diseases.Human mutation · 2026Review
- Navigating the molecular landscape: integrated multiomics liquid biopsy for biomarker discovery in early detection and monitoring of colorectal cancer.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite omics technologies gaining traction in clinical settings, particularly in oncology, challenges persist in their widespread adoption due to the pre-requisite robust evidence supporting efficacy and cost-effectiveness. This study aims to explore the experiences of organizations working in the health technology assessment (HTA) field in evaluating omics technologies, with a particular focus on the adoption and application of specific assessment frameworks.
methodsWe conducted a global survey to gather insights into current practices and frameworks used in HTA evaluations of omics technologies.
resultsWe gathered responses from thirty-nine participants representing organizations across twenty-nine countries and five continents. Among them, 51 percent (n = 20) reported experience in evaluating omics technologies, including multi-omics tests for early disease detection, biomarker-based cancer diagnostics, and advanced genomic sequencing techniques. Only three organizations employed specific assessment frameworks: the DISCUSSION: Despite their relevance, the limited adoption of tailored frameworks highlights the need for more structured and context-specific approaches to facilitate the integration of omics technologies into healthcare systems. Collaborative efforts among stakeholders, including patients, healthcare providers, policymakers, and industry representatives, are crucial for devising robust evaluation strategies addressing the complexities of omics technologies comprehensively.
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.