HTA process steps

Value Judgments Made Explicit (Evaluations)

Criteria

References

1. Agency’s Official Mandate (scientific expectations, ethical analysis, assessment & appraisal)

Relevance of deliverables for decision-making.

Health care.

Health expenditures.

(European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA), 2016; Hofmann, 2013)

2. Analysis of HTA request

Possible conflict of interest.

Interest from initiator of the report.

(Busse et al., 2002; European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA), 2016)

3. Evaluation of HTA Request

Relevance of the request.

Relevance of research questions addressing the impacts of the technology.

Overall costs of HTA.

(Busse et al., 2002; European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA), 2016; Hofmann, 2013; Strech & Tilburt, 2008)

4. Priority Setting for requests

Importance of the request.

Urgency.

(Hofmann, 2013; Hofmann et al., 2014a, 2014b)

5. Scoping

a) Strategic Analysis

(Choice of parties involved in the scoping process)

b) Preliminary Analysis

Relevance of selected parties.

Relevance of selected issues.

Quality of information gathered for the scoping.

Relevance of the choice of comparator (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Setting)

Weight of the information/results to frame the research questions.

Contribution to the process.

Relevance addressing the impacts of the technology.

Idem.

Idem.

Idem.

(Busse et al., 2002; European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA), 2016; Hofmann, 2013; Hofmann et al., 2014b; T he National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), 2008)

6. Framing the Policy Question

Importance of the action to be considered by the decision makers.

Impact of such action.

(Busse et al., 2002)

7. Framing the Research Questions

Importance of outcomes to be/not to be considered.

Relevance to agency’s mandate (1.).

Relevance to policy question (6.).

Relevance of technology’s impact analysis.

(Busse et al., 2002; European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA), 2016; Hofmann, 2013; Hofmann et al., 2014b; Strech & Tilburt, 2008)

8. Data Collection Strategy

Importance of criteria and measure procedures for each of the research question’s outcome.

Relevance of selected data bank.

Relevant information.

Idem.

(European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA), 2016; Hofmann, 2013; Strech & Tilburt, 2008)

9. Data Gathering

Relevance of inclusion/exclusion criteria.

Relevant information.

(Hofmann, 2013)

10. Results and Evaluation of Evidence

Quality of the evidence.

Validity of the information.

(Hofmann et al., 2014a; Strech & Tilburt, 2008)

11. Evidence Synthesis and Results Presentation

Importance of some data/non-importance of other.

Relevance to agency’s mandate (1.).

Relevance to policy question (6.).

Relevance to research question (7.).

(Busse et al., 2002; European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA), 2016; Hofmann, 2013; Hofmann et al., 2014b)

12. Discussion of Results

Relevance of the results discussed.

Relevance to agency’s mandate (1.).

Relevance to policy question (6.).

Relevance to research question (7.).

(Hofmann et al., 2014a)