Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.author
Oortwijn, Wija  
dc.contributor.author
Husereau, Don  
dc.contributor.author
Abelson, Julia  
dc.contributor.author
Barasa, Edwine  
dc.contributor.author
Bayani, Diana  
dc.contributor.author
Canuto Santos, Vania  
dc.contributor.author
Culyer, Anthony  
dc.contributor.author
Facey, Karen  
dc.contributor.author
Grainger, David  
dc.contributor.author
Kieslich, Katharina  
dc.contributor.author
Ollendorf, Daniel  
dc.contributor.author
Pichón-riviere, Andres  
dc.contributor.author
Sandman, Lars  
dc.contributor.author
Strammiello, Valentina  
dc.contributor.author
Teerawattananon, Yot  
dc.date.available
2023-11-09T13:19:49Z  
dc.date.issued
2022-06  
dc.identifier.citation
Oortwijn, Wija; Husereau, Don; Abelson, Julia; Barasa, Edwine; Bayani, Diana; et al.; Designing and Implementing Deliberative Processes for Health Technology Assessment: A Good Practices Report of a Joint HTAi/ISPOR Task Force; Elsevier; Value In Health; 25; 6; 6-2022; 869-886  
dc.identifier.issn
1098-3015  
dc.identifier.uri
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/217642  
dc.description.abstract
Objectives: Deliberative processes for health technology assessment (HTA) are intended to facilitate participatory decision making, using discussion and open dialogue between stakeholders. Increasing attention is being given to deliberative processes, but guidance is lacking for those who wish to design or use them. Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) and ISPOR—The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research initiated a joint Task Force to address this gap. Methods: The joint Task Force consisted of 15 members with different backgrounds, perspectives, and expertise relevant to the field. It developed guidance and a checklist for deliberative processes for HTA. The guidance builds upon the few, existing initiatives in the field, as well as input from the HTA community following an established consultation plan. In addition, the guidance was subject to 2 rounds of peer review. Results: A deliberative process for HTA consists of procedures, activities, and events that support the informed and critical examination of an issue and the weighing of arguments and evidence to guide a subsequent decision. Guidance and an accompanying checklist are provided for (i) developing the governance and structure of an HTA program and (ii) informing how the various stages of an HTA process might be managed using deliberation. Conclusions: The guidance and the checklist contain a series of questions, grouped by 6 phases of a model deliberative process. They are offered as practical tools for those wishing to establish or improve deliberative processes for HTA that are fit for local contexts. The tools can also be used for independent scrutiny of deliberative processes.  
dc.format
application/pdf  
dc.language.iso
eng  
dc.publisher
Elsevier  
dc.rights
info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess  
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/  
dc.subject
DELIBERATIVE PROCESSES  
dc.subject
GUIDANCE  
dc.subject
HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT  
dc.subject
PARTICIPATION  
dc.subject
STAKEHOLDERS  
dc.subject.classification
Políticas y Servicios de Salud  
dc.subject.classification
Ciencias de la Salud  
dc.subject.classification
CIENCIAS MÉDICAS Y DE LA SALUD  
dc.title
Designing and Implementing Deliberative Processes for Health Technology Assessment: A Good Practices Report of a Joint HTAi/ISPOR Task Force  
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article  
dc.type
info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo  
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion  
dc.date.updated
2023-11-06T15:28:34Z  
dc.journal.volume
25  
dc.journal.number
6  
dc.journal.pagination
869-886  
dc.journal.pais
Países Bajos  
dc.journal.ciudad
Amsterdam  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Oortwijn, Wija. Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen; Países Bajos  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Husereau, Don. University of Ottawa; Canadá  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Abelson, Julia. Mc Master University; Canadá  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Barasa, Edwine. Wellcome Trust Research Programme; Kenia  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Bayani, Diana. National University Of Singapore; Singapur  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Canuto Santos, Vania. Ministerio Da Saude; Brasil  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Culyer, Anthony. University of York; Reino Unido  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Facey, Karen. No especifíca;  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Grainger, David. Biointelect; Australia  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Kieslich, Katharina. Universidad de Viena; Austria  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Ollendorf, Daniel. Tufts University; Estados Unidos  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Pichón-riviere, Andres. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; Argentina  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Sandman, Lars. Linköping University; Suecia  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Strammiello, Valentina. European Patients’ Forum; Bélgica  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Teerawattananon, Yot. Thailand Ministry Of Public Health; Tailandia  
dc.journal.title
Value In Health  
dc.relation.alternativeid
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/ark/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1098301522001607  
dc.relation.alternativeid
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2022.03.018