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...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
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 |