Health technology assessment of public health interventions: an analysis of characteristics and comparison of methods—study protocol

Mathes, Tim; Willms, Gerald; Stegbauer, Constance; Messer, Melanie; Klingler, Corinna; Ehrenreich, Hannelore; Niebuhr, Dea; Marckmann, Georg; Gerhardus, Ansgar; Pieper, Dawid

doi:10.1186/s13643-018-0743-4

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The detailed methods are presented in our protocol (11). As no outcome of direct patient or clinical relevance is assessed in this work, the protocol was not registered in PROSPERO.…”

Section: Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health Technology Assessment of Public Health Interventions Published 2012 to 2016: An Analysis of Characteristics and Comparison of Methods

Mathes

Klingler²,

Messer

et al. 2019

Int J Technol Assess Health Care

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to provide an overview of the methodological characteristics and compare the assessment methods applied in health technology assessments (HTAs) of public health interventions (PHIs).MethodsWe defined a PHI as a population-based intervention on health promotion or for primary prevention of chronic or nonchronic diseases. HTAs on PHIs were identified by systematically searching the Web pages of members of international HTA networks. We included only full HTA reports published between 2012 and 2016. Two reviewers extracted data on the methods used to assess effectiveness/safety, as well as on economic, social, cultural, ethical, and legal aspects using a-priori standardized tables.ResultsWe included ten HTAs provided by four different organizations. Of these, all reports assessed the effectiveness of the interventions and conducted economic evaluations, seven investigated social/cultural aspects, and four each considered legal and ethical aspects, respectively. Some reports addressed applicability, context/setting, and intervention fidelity issues in different ways. We found that most HTAs adapted their methods to some extent, for example, by including nonrandomized studies, expanding the search strategy, involving stakeholders, or applying a framework to guide the HTA process.ConclusionsOur analysis provides a comprehensive overview of methods applied in HTAs on public health interventions. We found that a heterogeneous set of approaches is used to deal with the challenges of evaluating complex public health interventions.

show abstract

“…The detailed methods are presented in our protocol (11). As no outcome of direct patient or clinical relevance is assessed in this work, the protocol was not registered in PROSPERO.…”

Section: Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health Technology Assessment of Public Health Interventions Published 2012 to 2016: An Analysis of Characteristics and Comparison of Methods

Mathes

Klingler²,

Messer

et al. 2019

Int J Technol Assess Health Care

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Reshaping the current public health HTA methods and related practices of policy priority setting will be crucial for implementing efficient and effective interventions. The quickly expanding use of the HTA concepts by professionals and stakeholders from different horizons holds great promise for ameliorations in PH-oriented research and strategies across the different scientific and policy territories in spite of the challenges this poses (13,(49)(50)(51).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A recent systematic review about HTAs of PH interventions reported a limited number of guidelines in this field. The authors also observed numerous, and often unjustified, changes to recommendations such as adaptations in the processes of quality evaluation, assessment of applicability, and integration of qualitative and quantitative evidence (12,13). These methodological tweaks were mainly linked to the fact that complex PH interventions implement diverse methodologies that often fall outside a controlled experimental setup such as those processed in randomized controlled trials.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Public Health Interventions: A Neglected Area in Health Technology Assessment

Stojanovic

Wübbeler

Geis

et al. 2020

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Public health (PH) interventions are crucial for ensuring sustainable healthcare services. Nevertheless, they represent a neglected area in the field of health technology assessment (HTA) due to various methodological issues and their complex design that goes beyond clinical setting. The present study provides an environmental scan of HTA initiatives related to the assessment of PH technologies on a global level.Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey among 85 HTA-related European and international societies, health bodies, and networks from September 2018 to January 2019. The questionnaire contained four sections and 18 questions regarding activities related to the evaluation of PH technologies, information on existing PH technologies, and methodologies of assessment as well as barriers and facilitators to reaching a decision and implementing a PH technology.Results: Among 52 survey responses, the majority of the respondents came from European countries (35%), followed by North American (27%), and South American (19%) countries. The main type of organizations covered by our survey included HTA agencies, public administrations, and research institutes. Seventy-one % of the institutions reported engagement in any aspect of HTA in the area of PH (N = 37). Among those, 81% evaluated less than 5 PH technologies from 2013 to 2018. The most common barriers for reaching a decision on PH technologies were lack of data, conflicting stakeholder priorities, and methodological issues. A total of 76 PH interventions were reported, and most cited initiatives were related to chronic disease screening, prevention of infectious diseases, and maternal, prenatal, and neonatal screening.Conclusion: Our survey reported a rather limited involvement of HTA in the evaluation of PH technologies. In particular, an evaluation of behavioral and lifestyle interventions remains extremely rare. The implementation of collaborative HTA approaches in the setting of PH practice and policy needs to be prioritized and further strengthened. Moreover, ensuring reliable data structures and consolidation of HTA methods for the evaluation of PH technologies will be crucial for tackling the enormous burden of non-communicable diseases in societies.

show abstract

“…The HTA of CIs is an emerging research area that is still fragmented, complex, broad, poorly understood, understudied or not researched in detail. 68 69 The scoping review represents the most suitable method for responding to the questions of the proposed study, as it aims to outline, map, synthesise and disseminate different concepts and types of evidence that exist around the conduct of HTA in relation to CIs, and identify the gaps for further research.…”

Section: Methods and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Methods for the health technology assessment of complex interventions: a protocol for a scoping review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionIn healthcare policy and economic literature, research on the health technology assessment (HTA) of complex interventions (CIs) is becoming increasingly important. In many developed countries, HTA guides decision-making to help achieve greater value for money when funding health care. However, research has yet to identify the forms of evidence and evaluation criteria that should be used in the HTA of CIs. Previous research has established that the HTA of CIs requires multiple factors to be evaluated but there is no agreement on which factors ought always to be considered. There is equally little agreement on which forms of evidence ought to be collected or synthesised and how. We plan to perform a systematic scoping review in order to identify the range of evaluation criteria and types of evidence currently used in the HTA of CIs.Method and analysisThis protocol was developed to guide the methodological framework for the conduct of a scoping review on health technology assessment (HTA) of complex interventions (CIs), using the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and the six-stage framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley, in addition to more recent innovations in scoping review methodology. A grey literature search will supplement the primary searches of seven electronic databases for studies available in English between January 2000 and August 2020. Two reviewers will independently screen all search results for inclusion and data will be extracted using a customised data extraction or charting form. Any dispute will be resolved by consensus or through arbitration by a third author. The mnemonic Population, Concept and Context will be adopted to establish criteria for selecting relevant literature, and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: Extension for Scoping Review will be used for reporting the results. Several explanatory-descriptive methods will be used for analysing the extracted data including frequency and trend analyses as well as reflexive thematic coding and analysis.Mapping evidence on the HTA of CIs will allow us to gain a better understanding of both established and emerging practices, including the information types, requirements, values and parameters that are incorporated in the HTA of CIs. We also expect the findings of the scoping review to help identify research gaps that will guide future studies. As healthcare becomes more complex in its delivery, it is timely to determine how these complex interventions should be assessed so that policy decisions can be made about whether implementation and public funding is warranted.Ethics and DisseminationThis scoping review will involve secondary analysis of already collected data, and thus, does not require ethics approval. The research findings will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals for publication and will also be disseminated at conferences and seminars.

show abstract

Health technology assessment of public health interventions: an analysis of characteristics and comparison of methods—study protocol

Cited by 6 publications

References 14 publications

Health Technology Assessment of Public Health Interventions Published 2012 to 2016: An Analysis of Characteristics and Comparison of Methods

Health Technology Assessment of Public Health Interventions Published 2012 to 2016: An Analysis of Characteristics and Comparison of Methods

Evaluating Public Health Interventions: A Neglected Area in Health Technology Assessment

Methods for the health technology assessment of complex interventions: a protocol for a scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About