Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Differences between systematic reviews and health technology assessments: A trade-off between the ideals of scientific rigor and the realities of policy making

  • Dalia Rotstein (a1) and Andreas Laupacis (a2)

Objectives: To elucidate important differences between a health technology assessment (HTA) and a systematic review, using an HTA of positron emission tomography (PET) as an example.

Methods: Interviews with seventeen individuals who were authors or users of the PET HTA.

Results: Those interviewed identified seven areas in which HTAs often differ from traditional systematic reviews: (i) methodological standards (HTAs may include literature of relatively poor methodological quality if a topic is of importance to decision-makers), (ii) replication of previous studies (relatively common for HTAs but not systematic reviews), (iii) choice of topics (more policy oriented for HTAs, while systematic reviews tend to be driven by researcher interest), (iv) inclusion of content experts and policy-makers as authors (policy-makers more likely to be included in HTAs, although there are potential conflicts of interest), (v) inclusion of economic evaluations (more often with HTAs, although economic evaluations based upon poor clinical data may not be useful), (vi) making policy recommendations (more likely with HTAs, although this must be done with caution), and (vii) dissemination of the report (more often actively done for HTAs).

Conclusions: This case study of an HTA of PET scanning confirms that HTAs are a bridge between science and policy and require a balance between the ideals of scientific rigor and the realities of policy making.

Corresponding author
Correspondence to Dr. Andreas Laupacis at
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.

GarberAM, SolomonNA. 1999Cost-effectiveness of alternative test strategies for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Ann Intern Med. 130: 719728.

LomasJ. 1993Diffusion, dissemination, and implementation: Who should do what? Ann N Y Acad Sci. 703: 226235.

SiebelinkHJ, BlanksmaPK, CrijnsHJ, et al. 2001No difference in cardiac event-free survival between positron emission tomography-guided and single-photon emission computed tomograph-guided patient management. J Am Coll Cardiol. 37: 8188.

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? *



Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 2
Total number of PDF views: 7 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 46 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 30th May 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.