Cargando…

Field testing of a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework for coverage of a screening test for cervical cancer in South Africa

BACKGROUND: Systematic and transparent approaches to priority setting are needed, particularly in low-resource settings, to produce decisions that are sound and acceptable to stakeholders. The EVIDEM framework brings together Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and multi-criteria decision analysis (M...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Miot, Jacqui, Wagner, Monika, Khoury, Hanane, Rindress, Donna, Goetghebeur, Mireille M
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3330006/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22376143
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-7547-10-2
_version_ 1782229913835667456
author Miot, Jacqui
Wagner, Monika
Khoury, Hanane
Rindress, Donna
Goetghebeur, Mireille M
author_facet Miot, Jacqui
Wagner, Monika
Khoury, Hanane
Rindress, Donna
Goetghebeur, Mireille M
author_sort Miot, Jacqui
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Systematic and transparent approaches to priority setting are needed, particularly in low-resource settings, to produce decisions that are sound and acceptable to stakeholders. The EVIDEM framework brings together Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) by proposing a comprehensive set of decision criteria together with standardized processes to support decisionmaking. The objective of the study was to field test the framework for decisionmaking on a screening test by a private health plan in South Africa. METHODS: Liquid-based cytology (LBC) for cervical cancer screening was selected by the health plan for this field test. An HTA report structured by decision criterion (14 criteria organized in the MCDA matrix and 4 contextual criteria) was produced based on a literature review and input from the health plan. During workshop sessions, committee members 1) weighted each MCDA decision criterion to express their individual perspectives, and 2) to appraise LBC, assigned scores to each MCDA criterion on the basis of the by-criterion HTA report. Committee members then considered the potential impacts of four contextual criteria on the use of LBC in the context of their health plan. Feedback on the framework and process was collected through discussion and from a questionnaire. RESULTS: For 9 of the MCDA matrix decision criteria, 89% or more of committee members thought they should always be considered in decisionmaking. Greatest weights were given to the criteria "Budget impact", "Cost-effectiveness" and "Completeness and consistency of reporting evidence". When appraising LBC for cervical cancer screening, the committee assigned the highest scores to "Relevance and validity of evidence" and "Disease severity". Combination of weights and scores yielded a mean MCDA value estimate of 46% (SD 7%) of the potential maximum value. Overall, the committee felt the framework brought greater clarity to the decisionmaking process and was easily adaptable to different types of health interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The EVIDEM framework was easily adapted to evaluating a screening technology in South Africa, thereby broadening its applicability in healthcare decision making.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3330006
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33300062012-04-20 Field testing of a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework for coverage of a screening test for cervical cancer in South Africa Miot, Jacqui Wagner, Monika Khoury, Hanane Rindress, Donna Goetghebeur, Mireille M Cost Eff Resour Alloc Research BACKGROUND: Systematic and transparent approaches to priority setting are needed, particularly in low-resource settings, to produce decisions that are sound and acceptable to stakeholders. The EVIDEM framework brings together Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) by proposing a comprehensive set of decision criteria together with standardized processes to support decisionmaking. The objective of the study was to field test the framework for decisionmaking on a screening test by a private health plan in South Africa. METHODS: Liquid-based cytology (LBC) for cervical cancer screening was selected by the health plan for this field test. An HTA report structured by decision criterion (14 criteria organized in the MCDA matrix and 4 contextual criteria) was produced based on a literature review and input from the health plan. During workshop sessions, committee members 1) weighted each MCDA decision criterion to express their individual perspectives, and 2) to appraise LBC, assigned scores to each MCDA criterion on the basis of the by-criterion HTA report. Committee members then considered the potential impacts of four contextual criteria on the use of LBC in the context of their health plan. Feedback on the framework and process was collected through discussion and from a questionnaire. RESULTS: For 9 of the MCDA matrix decision criteria, 89% or more of committee members thought they should always be considered in decisionmaking. Greatest weights were given to the criteria "Budget impact", "Cost-effectiveness" and "Completeness and consistency of reporting evidence". When appraising LBC for cervical cancer screening, the committee assigned the highest scores to "Relevance and validity of evidence" and "Disease severity". Combination of weights and scores yielded a mean MCDA value estimate of 46% (SD 7%) of the potential maximum value. Overall, the committee felt the framework brought greater clarity to the decisionmaking process and was easily adaptable to different types of health interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The EVIDEM framework was easily adapted to evaluating a screening technology in South Africa, thereby broadening its applicability in healthcare decision making. BioMed Central 2012-02-29 /pmc/articles/PMC3330006/ /pubmed/22376143 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-7547-10-2 Text en Copyright ©2012 Miot 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
Miot, Jacqui
Wagner, Monika
Khoury, Hanane
Rindress, Donna
Goetghebeur, Mireille M
Field testing of a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework for coverage of a screening test for cervical cancer in South Africa
title Field testing of a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework for coverage of a screening test for cervical cancer in South Africa
title_full Field testing of a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework for coverage of a screening test for cervical cancer in South Africa
title_fullStr Field testing of a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework for coverage of a screening test for cervical cancer in South Africa
title_full_unstemmed Field testing of a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework for coverage of a screening test for cervical cancer in South Africa
title_short Field testing of a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework for coverage of a screening test for cervical cancer in South Africa
title_sort field testing of a multicriteria decision analysis (mcda) framework for coverage of a screening test for cervical cancer in south africa
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3330006/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22376143
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-7547-10-2
work_keys_str_mv AT miotjacqui fieldtestingofamulticriteriadecisionanalysismcdaframeworkforcoverageofascreeningtestforcervicalcancerinsouthafrica
AT wagnermonika fieldtestingofamulticriteriadecisionanalysismcdaframeworkforcoverageofascreeningtestforcervicalcancerinsouthafrica
AT khouryhanane fieldtestingofamulticriteriadecisionanalysismcdaframeworkforcoverageofascreeningtestforcervicalcancerinsouthafrica
AT rindressdonna fieldtestingofamulticriteriadecisionanalysismcdaframeworkforcoverageofascreeningtestforcervicalcancerinsouthafrica
AT goetghebeurmireillem fieldtestingofamulticriteriadecisionanalysismcdaframeworkforcoverageofascreeningtestforcervicalcancerinsouthafrica