Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 7
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    O'Brien, C. Fogarty, E. Walsh, C. Dempsey, O. Barry, M. Kennedy, M.J. and McCullagh, L. 2015. The cost of the inpatient management of febrile neutropenia in cancer patients - a micro-costing study in the Irish healthcare setting. European Journal of Cancer Care, Vol. 24, Issue. 1, p. 125.


    Wonder, Michael and Dunlop, Sheryl 2015. Assessment of the Quality of the Clinical Evidence in Submissions to the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee: Fit for Purpose?. Value in Health, Vol. 18, Issue. 4, p. 467.


    Allen, Nicola Pichler, Franz Wang, Tina Patel, Sundip and Salek, Sam 2013. Development of archetypes for non-ranking classification and comparison of European National Health Technology Assessment systems. Health Policy, Vol. 113, Issue. 3, p. 305.


    Drummond, Michael Tarricone, Rosanna and Torbica, Aleksandra 2013. Assessing the Added Value of Health Technologies: Reconciling Different Perspectives. Value in Health, Vol. 16, Issue. 1, p. S7.


    Mathes, Tim Jacobs, Esther Morfeld, Jana-Carina and Pieper, Dawid 2013. Methods of international health technology assessment agencies for economic evaluations- a comparative analysis. BMC Health Services Research, Vol. 13, Issue. 1,


    Goodman, Clifford 2012. TOWARD INTERNATIONAL GOOD PRACTICES IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Vol. 28, Issue. 02, p. 169.


    Mäkelä, Marjukka 2012. EXCHANGING VIEWS ON HTA. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Vol. 28, Issue. 02, p. 85.


    ×
  • International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Volume 28, Issue 2
  • April 2012, pp. 159-165

CAN WE RELIABLY BENCHMARK HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT ORGANIZATIONS?

  • Michael Drummond (a1), Peter Neumann (a2), Bengt Jönsson (a3), Bryan Luce (a4), J. Sanford Schwartz (a5), Uwe Siebert (a6) and Sean D. Sullivan (a7)
  • DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0266462312000098
  • Published online: 13 April 2012
Abstract

Objectives: In recent years, there has been growth in the use of health technology assessment (HTA) for making decisions about the reimbursement, coverage, or guidance on the use of health technologies. Given this greater emphasis on the use of HTA, it is important to develop standards of good practice and to benchmark the various HTA organizations against these standards.

Methods: This study discusses the conceptual and methodological challenges associated with benchmarking HTA organizations and proposes a series of audit questions based on a previously published set of principles of good practice.

Results and Conclusions: It is concluded that a benchmarking exercise would be feasible and useful, although the question of who should do the benchmarking requires further discussion. Key issues for further research are the alternative methods for weighting the various principles and for generating an overall score, or summary statement of adherence to the principles. Any weighting system, if developed, would need to be explored in different jurisdictions to assess the extent to which the relative importance of the principles is perceived to vary. Finally, the development and precise wording of the audit questions requires further study, with a view to making the questions as unambiguous as possible, and the reproducibility of the assessments as high as possible.

Copyright
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

2.JP Bridges , B Hauber , D Marshall , Conjoint analysis applications in health: A checklist. A report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health. 2011;14:403413.

5.C-F Chiou , JW Hay , JF Wallace , Development and validation of a grading system for the quality of cost-effectiveness studies. Med Care. 2003;41:3244.

8.MF Drummond , JS Schwartz , B Jönsson , BR Luce , PJ Neumann . Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008; 24:244258.

17.PJ Neumann , MS Kamae , JA Palmer . Medicare's national coverage decisions for technologies, 1999-2007. Health Aff (Millwood). 2008;27:16201631.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
  • ISSN: 0266-4623
  • EISSN: 1471-6348
  • URL: /core/journals/international-journal-of-technology-assessment-in-health-care
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords: