1. Abelson, J, Gauvin, F-P. Engaging citizens: One route to health care accountability. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks; 2004. http://cprn.org/documents/28104_en.pdf (accessed September 27, 2010).
2. Abelson, J, Giacomini, M, Lehoux P, Gauvin F-P. Bringing ‘the public’ into health technology assessment and coverage policy decisions: From principles to practice. Health Policy. 2007;82:37–50.
3. Banta, D. The development of health technology assessment. Health Policy. 2003;63:121–132.
4. Baumgartner, FR, Jones, BD. Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 1993.
6. Chinitz, D. Health technology assessment in four countries: Response from political science. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20:55–60.
7. Coulter, A. Perspectives on health technology assessment: Response from the patient's perspective. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20:92–96.
9. Florin, D, Dixon, J. Public involvement in health care. BMJ. 2004;328:159–161.
10. Gauvin, F-P. Public involvement in health technology assessment agencies: A comparative analysis of Canada, Denmark and the United Kingdom. Health Research Methodology Doctoral Programme. Hamilton, Ontario: McMaster University; 2008:236.
11. Gauvin, F-P, Abelson, J, Giacomini, M, Eyles, J, Lavis, JN. “It all depends”: Conceptualizing public involvement in the context of health technology assessment agencies. Soc Sci Med. 2010;70:1518–1526.
12. Hailey, D, Nordwall, M. Survey on the involvement of consumers in health technology assessment programs. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2006;22:497–499.
15. Jorgensen, T, Hvenegaard, A, Kristensen, FB. Health technology assessment in Denmark. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2000;16:347–381.
16. Kingdon, JW. Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. 2nd ed. New York: Longman; 2003.
17. Lehoux, P. The problem of health technology: Policy implications for modern health care systems. New York: Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group; 2006.
18. Leys, M. Health technology assessment: The contribution of qualitative research. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2003;19:317–329.
19. McDaid, D. Co-ordinating health technology assessment in Canada: A European perspective. Health Policy. 2003;63:205–213.
20. Morse, JM, Mitcham, C. Exploring qualitatively-derived concepts: Inductive-deductive pitfalls. Int J Qual Methods. 2002;1:1–13.
21. Moynihan, R, Oxmand, AD, Lavis, JN, Paulsen, E. Evidence-informed health policy: Using research to make health systems healthier. Oslo: Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services; 2008:112. http://www.kunnskapssenteret.no/binary?id=1233 (accessed September 27, 2010). 22. Oliver, S, Armes, D, Gyte, G. Evaluation of public influence on the NHS Health Technology Assessment Programme (Executive summary). London: Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London; 2006:12. http://www.hta.ac.uk/public/evaluation_execsumm.pdf (accessed September 27, 2010).
24. Strauss, AL, Corbin, J. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1998.
25. ten Have, H. Ethical perspectives on health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20:71–76.