Achieving Patient-Centered Value/Health Technology Assessment: Recommendations From a Multistakeholder eDelphi Panel.

IF 6 2区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Julia F Slejko, Tara A Lavelle, Joe Vandigo, Omar A Escontrías, Silke C Schoch, Elisabeth M Oehrlein
{"title":"Achieving Patient-Centered Value/Health Technology Assessment: Recommendations From a Multistakeholder eDelphi Panel.","authors":"Julia F Slejko, Tara A Lavelle, Joe Vandigo, Omar A Escontrías, Silke C Schoch, Elisabeth M Oehrlein","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2025.06.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Current methodological guidelines for value/health technology assessment (V/HTA) and cost-effectiveness analysis describe traditional approaches not originally created to be patient centered. The objective of this study was to identify opportunities for guidance and develop a set of consensus recommendations on methods and needs for patient-centered V/HTA, including identifying and collecting data inputs, results reporting, and future priority topics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study included multiple phases: (1) listening sessions with 10 patient group representatives to elicit priorities for patient-centered data elements for V/HTA; (2) leverage findings from step 1 to inform qualitative interviews with 10 health economists to guide the development of an eDelphi instrument; and (3) use the findings from step 1 and 2 to conduct an eDelphi exercise with multistakeholder participants to develop consensus recommendations that guide patient-centered V/HTA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After 2 Delphi rounds, 28 statements achieved consensus (≥80% agreement); 2 statements did not achieve consensus (<80% agreement). The recommendations included a need for data that more broadly reflect the impacts, both inside and outside the healthcare sector, relevant to patients and more accurately reflect the real-world natural history of disease. There was consensus on the need for patient input throughout the assessment process, including plain-language reporting that improves inclusion of patient audiences.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Multistakeholder consensus on the recommendations presented serve as a basis for future work toward progressing patient-centered V/HTA.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2025.06.014","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Current methodological guidelines for value/health technology assessment (V/HTA) and cost-effectiveness analysis describe traditional approaches not originally created to be patient centered. The objective of this study was to identify opportunities for guidance and develop a set of consensus recommendations on methods and needs for patient-centered V/HTA, including identifying and collecting data inputs, results reporting, and future priority topics.

Methods: This study included multiple phases: (1) listening sessions with 10 patient group representatives to elicit priorities for patient-centered data elements for V/HTA; (2) leverage findings from step 1 to inform qualitative interviews with 10 health economists to guide the development of an eDelphi instrument; and (3) use the findings from step 1 and 2 to conduct an eDelphi exercise with multistakeholder participants to develop consensus recommendations that guide patient-centered V/HTA.

Results: After 2 Delphi rounds, 28 statements achieved consensus (≥80% agreement); 2 statements did not achieve consensus (<80% agreement). The recommendations included a need for data that more broadly reflect the impacts, both inside and outside the healthcare sector, relevant to patients and more accurately reflect the real-world natural history of disease. There was consensus on the need for patient input throughout the assessment process, including plain-language reporting that improves inclusion of patient audiences.

Conclusions: Multistakeholder consensus on the recommendations presented serve as a basis for future work toward progressing patient-centered V/HTA.

实现以患者为中心的V/HTA:来自多方利益相关者eDelphi小组的建议。
目的:价值/卫生技术评估(V/HTA)和成本效益分析的现行方法指南描述的传统方法最初并非以患者为中心。本研究的目的是确定以患者为中心的V/HTA方法和需求的指导机会,并制定一套共识建议,包括识别和收集数据输入,结果报告和未来的优先主题。方法:本研究包括多个阶段:1)与10名患者组代表进行倾听,以引出以患者为中心的V/HTA数据元素的优先事项;2)利用第一步的发现,对10位卫生经济学家进行定性访谈,以指导eDelphi工具的开发;3)利用第2步的发现,与多方利益相关者一起进行eDelphi练习,以形成指导以患者为中心的V/HTA的共识建议。结果:经过2轮德尔菲分析,28条陈述达到一致(≥80%);结论:多方利益相关者对所提出建议的共识可作为未来工作的基础,以推进以患者为中心的V/HTA。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Value in Health
Value in Health 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
3064
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信