Linking evidence from health technology assessments to policy and decision making: The Alberta Model

Abstract

Indigenous peoples are being marginalised globally from a socioeconomic perspective and are often excluded from mainstream communities for social and/or geographic reasons. Historically, they tend to have lower living standards, including poor health conditions as compared to the rest of the population. Literature suggests that information and communication technologies (ICTs) have the potential to improve awareness about how to improve health and wellbeing. In order to both deepen and broaden the understanding of how ICTs can influence Indigenous peoples' health-related decision-making, this study has developed a conceptual framework based on the capability approach, focusing on the five dimensions of freedoms suggested by Amartya Sen. Data collected from a sample of members of an Indigenous community in Bangladesh, using a purposive sampling method, were analysed through qualitative techniques to identify ways in which a mobile-based health system have influenced the lives of indigenous people. The findings revealed that the mobile healthcare system explored in this study addressed a number of factors pertaining to indigenous peoples' quality of life. These findings are useful for policy formulation related to the design and implementation of healthcare strategies in Bangladesh. The conceptual framework, following further validation, could serve as a platform for the advancement of research towards understanding how mobile healthcare systems can improve the wellbeing of individuals in indigenous communities.

Exploring policy-makers’ perspectives on disinvestment from ineffective healthcare practices

“…Additional resources to support HTA/disinvestment research would facilitate priority driven, contextually relevant research to support decisionmaking processes and to provide the answers that policy advisors/makers need (for an interesting commentary see Pirkis et al [22], and an initiative by Borowski et al [1]). Moreover, it would contribute much-needed methodological advances and align with the four main characteristics of action research defined by Hart and Bond (9): (i) collaboration between researchers and practitioners; (ii) solution of practical problems; (iii) change in practice; and (iv) development of theory.…”

Engaging the public in priority‐setting for health technology assessment: findings from a citizens’ jury

“…Each scenario comprised one paragraph describing the technology and indications for its use, the number of individuals anticipated to benefit, and, where possible, its estimated unit or per case cost. The level of information provided reflected that typically received by those involved in setting HTA priorities for the province 46 . After independently rating the importance of each technology on a scale of 1–5, jurors met in small groups to share and explain their choices and compile a list of criteria based on their rationales or reasons.…”

“…The level of information provided reflected that typically received by those involved in setting HTA priorities for the province. 46 After independently rating the importance of each technology on a scale of 1-5, jurors met in small groups to share and explain their choices and compile a list of criteria based on their rationales or reasons. They then reconvened to deliberate over and agree upon which criteria to include in an initial draft set.…”

The principles of Health Technology Assessment in laboratory medicine

“…In practical terms, to evaluate a technology, first of all it is necessary to "measure" it at a level of scientific evidence (verifying the supporting clinical testing quality, endpoint strength, choice of comparators) and then examine through empirical studies its therapeutic effect compared to the existing assistance to determine the ratio of incremental cost-effectiveness compared to the reference standard (technology used) [30][31][32].…”