MCDA (EVIDEM framework) could be a useful tool to complement the current evaluation methods of CatSalut, contributing to standardization and pragmatism, providing a method to tackle ethical dilemmas and facilitating discussions related to decision making.

or the decisionmaking phase (CATFAC). A majority (> 75%) of participants indicated that all EVIDEM criteria should be maintained, except for "Environmental impact" and "Mandate of healthcare system" which were deemed irrelevant by 56% and 44% of participants. Relative weights were similar for both elicitation methods (5-points scale and hierarchical point allocation) and were highest for criteria Disease severity (15%), Unmet needs (13%), Comparative effectiveness, Type of therapeutic benefit and Quality of evidence (all 10%). All participants indicated that EVIDEM would be useful. ConClusions: EVIDEM provides a feasible and useful framework to optimize current processes for evaluation of complex treatments by CATSALUT and facilitates tackling ethical dilemmas. Further piloting is on-going to implement the adapted framework in real-world setting.

Criteria least important were "other medical costs" (2.9 (1.2)) and "size of affected population" (1.7 (1.2)). Same ranking occurred using the hierarchical weighting technique. ConClusions: EVIDEM framework was considered a useful tool to complement the current CatSalut evaluation methods, contributing to standardisation and pragmatism, as well as facilitating healthcare decision-making discussions. The evidence matrix and criteria scoring were considered the most potentially applicable and useful tools to PASFTAC. HT6CriTeria Driving values assessmenTs in mulTiple sClerosis meDiCines