Cargando…

Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies: A Reflection on Legitimacy, Values and Patient and Public Involvement Comment on "Use of Evidence-informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe"

Legitimacy of deliberation processes leading to recommendations for public financing or clinical practice depends on the data considered, stakeholders involved and the process by which both of these are selected and organised. Oortwijn et al provides an interesting exploration of processes currently...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Goetghebeur, Mireille, Cellier, Marjo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Kerman University of Medical Sciences 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8167272/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32610794
http://dx.doi.org/10.34172/ijhpm.2020.46
_version_ 1783701660422373376
author Goetghebeur, Mireille
Cellier, Marjo
author_facet Goetghebeur, Mireille
Cellier, Marjo
author_sort Goetghebeur, Mireille
collection PubMed
description Legitimacy of deliberation processes leading to recommendations for public financing or clinical practice depends on the data considered, stakeholders involved and the process by which both of these are selected and organised. Oortwijn et al provides an interesting exploration of processes currently in place in health technology assessment (HTA) agencies. However, agencies are struggling with core issues central to their legitimacy that goes beyond the procedural exploration of Oortwijn et al, such as: how processes reflect the mission and values of the agencies? How they ensure that recommendations are fair and reasonable? Which role should be given to public and patient involvement? Do agencies have a positive impact on the healthcare system and the populations served? What are the drivers of their evolution? We concur with Culyer commentary on the need of learning from doing what works best and that a reflection is indeed needed to "enhance the fairness and legitimacy of HTA."
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8167272
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Kerman University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81672722021-06-07 Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies: A Reflection on Legitimacy, Values and Patient and Public Involvement Comment on "Use of Evidence-informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe" Goetghebeur, Mireille Cellier, Marjo Int J Health Policy Manag Commentary Legitimacy of deliberation processes leading to recommendations for public financing or clinical practice depends on the data considered, stakeholders involved and the process by which both of these are selected and organised. Oortwijn et al provides an interesting exploration of processes currently in place in health technology assessment (HTA) agencies. However, agencies are struggling with core issues central to their legitimacy that goes beyond the procedural exploration of Oortwijn et al, such as: how processes reflect the mission and values of the agencies? How they ensure that recommendations are fair and reasonable? Which role should be given to public and patient involvement? Do agencies have a positive impact on the healthcare system and the populations served? What are the drivers of their evolution? We concur with Culyer commentary on the need of learning from doing what works best and that a reflection is indeed needed to "enhance the fairness and legitimacy of HTA." Kerman University of Medical Sciences 2020-04-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8167272/ /pubmed/32610794 http://dx.doi.org/10.34172/ijhpm.2020.46 Text en © 2021 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Commentary
Goetghebeur, Mireille
Cellier, Marjo
Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies: A Reflection on Legitimacy, Values and Patient and Public Involvement Comment on "Use of Evidence-informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe"
title Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies: A Reflection on Legitimacy, Values and Patient and Public Involvement Comment on "Use of Evidence-informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe"
title_full Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies: A Reflection on Legitimacy, Values and Patient and Public Involvement Comment on "Use of Evidence-informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe"
title_fullStr Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies: A Reflection on Legitimacy, Values and Patient and Public Involvement Comment on "Use of Evidence-informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe"
title_full_unstemmed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies: A Reflection on Legitimacy, Values and Patient and Public Involvement Comment on "Use of Evidence-informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe"
title_short Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies: A Reflection on Legitimacy, Values and Patient and Public Involvement Comment on "Use of Evidence-informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe"
title_sort deliberative processes by health technology assessment agencies: a reflection on legitimacy, values and patient and public involvement comment on "use of evidence-informed deliberative processes by health technology assessment agencies around the globe"
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8167272/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32610794
http://dx.doi.org/10.34172/ijhpm.2020.46
work_keys_str_mv AT goetghebeurmireille deliberativeprocessesbyhealthtechnologyassessmentagenciesareflectiononlegitimacyvaluesandpatientandpublicinvolvementcommentonuseofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesbyhealthtechnologyassessmentagenciesaroundtheglobe
AT celliermarjo deliberativeprocessesbyhealthtechnologyassessmentagenciesareflectiononlegitimacyvaluesandpatientandpublicinvolvementcommentonuseofevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesbyhealthtechnologyassessmentagenciesaroundtheglobe