Cargando…
Prioritisation criteria for the selection of new diagnostic technologies for evaluation
BACKGROUND: Currently there is no framework for those involved in the identification, evaluation and prioritisation of new diagnostic technologies. Therefore we aimed to develop prioritisation criteria for the assessment of new diagnostic technologies, by gaining international consensus on not only...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2881057/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20444274 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-10-109 |
_version_ | 1782182083693641728 |
---|---|
author | Plüddemann, Annette Heneghan, Carl Thompson, Matthew Roberts, Nia Summerton, Nicholas Linden-Phillips, Luan Packer, Claire Price, Christopher P |
author_facet | Plüddemann, Annette Heneghan, Carl Thompson, Matthew Roberts, Nia Summerton, Nicholas Linden-Phillips, Luan Packer, Claire Price, Christopher P |
author_sort | Plüddemann, Annette |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Currently there is no framework for those involved in the identification, evaluation and prioritisation of new diagnostic technologies. Therefore we aimed to develop prioritisation criteria for the assessment of new diagnostic technologies, by gaining international consensus on not only which criteria should be used, but also their relative importance. METHODS: A two-round Delphi process was used to generate consensus amongst an international panel of twenty-six experts on priority criteria for diagnostic health technology assessment. Participants represented a range of health care and related professions, including government, industry, health services and academia. RESULTS: Based on the responses to the first questionnaire 18 criteria were placed into three categories: high, intermediate and moderate priority. For 16 of the 18 criteria, agreement with the categorisation of the criteria into the high, intermediate and moderate categories was high at ≥ 70% (10 had agreement ≥ 80%). A further questionnaire and panel discussion reduced the criteria to 16 and two categories; seven were classified as high priority and nine intermediate. CONCLUSIONS: This study proposes an objective structure of prioritisation criteria to use when assessing new diagnostic technologies, based on an expert consensus process. The value of these criteria is that no one single component should be used as the decisive driver for prioritisation of new diagnostic technologies for adoption in healthcare settings. Future studies should be directed at establishing the value of these prioritisation criteria across a range of healthcare settings. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2881057 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2010 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-28810572010-06-05 Prioritisation criteria for the selection of new diagnostic technologies for evaluation Plüddemann, Annette Heneghan, Carl Thompson, Matthew Roberts, Nia Summerton, Nicholas Linden-Phillips, Luan Packer, Claire Price, Christopher P BMC Health Serv Res Research article BACKGROUND: Currently there is no framework for those involved in the identification, evaluation and prioritisation of new diagnostic technologies. Therefore we aimed to develop prioritisation criteria for the assessment of new diagnostic technologies, by gaining international consensus on not only which criteria should be used, but also their relative importance. METHODS: A two-round Delphi process was used to generate consensus amongst an international panel of twenty-six experts on priority criteria for diagnostic health technology assessment. Participants represented a range of health care and related professions, including government, industry, health services and academia. RESULTS: Based on the responses to the first questionnaire 18 criteria were placed into three categories: high, intermediate and moderate priority. For 16 of the 18 criteria, agreement with the categorisation of the criteria into the high, intermediate and moderate categories was high at ≥ 70% (10 had agreement ≥ 80%). A further questionnaire and panel discussion reduced the criteria to 16 and two categories; seven were classified as high priority and nine intermediate. CONCLUSIONS: This study proposes an objective structure of prioritisation criteria to use when assessing new diagnostic technologies, based on an expert consensus process. The value of these criteria is that no one single component should be used as the decisive driver for prioritisation of new diagnostic technologies for adoption in healthcare settings. Future studies should be directed at establishing the value of these prioritisation criteria across a range of healthcare settings. BioMed Central 2010-05-05 /pmc/articles/PMC2881057/ /pubmed/20444274 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-10-109 Text en Copyright ©2010 Plüddemann et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research article Plüddemann, Annette Heneghan, Carl Thompson, Matthew Roberts, Nia Summerton, Nicholas Linden-Phillips, Luan Packer, Claire Price, Christopher P Prioritisation criteria for the selection of new diagnostic technologies for evaluation |
title | Prioritisation criteria for the selection of new diagnostic technologies for evaluation |
title_full | Prioritisation criteria for the selection of new diagnostic technologies for evaluation |
title_fullStr | Prioritisation criteria for the selection of new diagnostic technologies for evaluation |
title_full_unstemmed | Prioritisation criteria for the selection of new diagnostic technologies for evaluation |
title_short | Prioritisation criteria for the selection of new diagnostic technologies for evaluation |
title_sort | prioritisation criteria for the selection of new diagnostic technologies for evaluation |
topic | Research article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2881057/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20444274 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-10-109 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pluddemannannette prioritisationcriteriafortheselectionofnewdiagnostictechnologiesforevaluation AT heneghancarl prioritisationcriteriafortheselectionofnewdiagnostictechnologiesforevaluation AT thompsonmatthew prioritisationcriteriafortheselectionofnewdiagnostictechnologiesforevaluation AT robertsnia prioritisationcriteriafortheselectionofnewdiagnostictechnologiesforevaluation AT summertonnicholas prioritisationcriteriafortheselectionofnewdiagnostictechnologiesforevaluation AT lindenphillipsluan prioritisationcriteriafortheselectionofnewdiagnostictechnologiesforevaluation AT packerclaire prioritisationcriteriafortheselectionofnewdiagnostictechnologiesforevaluation AT pricechristopherp prioritisationcriteriafortheselectionofnewdiagnostictechnologiesforevaluation |