Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Priority setting for health technology assessment at CADTH

  • Don Husereau (a1), Michel Boucher (a1) and Hussein Noorani (a1)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to describe a current practical approach of priority setting of health technology assessment (HTA) research that involves multi-criteria decision analysis and a deliberative process.

Methods: Criteria related to HTA prioritization were identified and grouped through a systematic review and consultation with a selection committee. Criteria were scored through a pair-wise comparison approach. Criteria were pruned based on the average weights obtained from consistent (consistency index < 0.2) responders and consensus. HTA proposals are ranked based on available information and a weighted criteria score. The rank, along with additional contextual information and discussion among committee members, is used to achieve consensus on HTA research priorities.

Results: Six of eleven criteria represented > 75 percent of the weight behind committee member decisions to conduct an HTA. These criteria were disease burden, clinical impact, alternatives, budget impact, economic impact, and available evidence. Since May 2006, committees have considered 102 proposals at sixteen biannual in-person advisory committee meetings. These have selected twenty-nine research priorities for the HTA program.

Conclusions: The approach works well and was easy to implement. Feedback from committee members has been positive. This approach may assist HTA and other research agencies in better priority setting by informing the selection of the most important and policy-relevant topics in the presence of a wide variety of research proposals. This may in turn lead to efficiently allocating resources available for HTA research.

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.

1.RN Battista , B Côté , MJ Hodge , D Husereau . Health technology assessment in Canada. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25 (Suppl 1):5360.

2.AJ Culyer , J Lomas . Deliberative processes and evidence-informed decision making in healthcare: Do they work and how might we know? Evid Policy. 2006;2:357371.

5.J Doyle , E Waters , D Yach , Global priority setting for Cochrane systematic reviews of health promotion and public health research. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005;59:193197.

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

7.DM Eddy . Selecting technologies for assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1989;5:484501.

10.S Innvaer , G Vist , M Trommald , A Oxman . Health policy-makers perceptions of their use of evidence: A systematic review. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2002;7:239244.

12.D Menon , T Stafinski . Health technology assessment in Canada: 20 years strong? Value Health. 2009;12 (Suppl 2):S14S19.

14. HZ Noorani , DR Husereau , R Boudreau , B Skidmore . Priority setting for health technology assessments: A systematic review of current practical approaches. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2007;23:310315.

15.CE Phelps , ST Parente . Priority setting in medical technology and medical practice assessment. Med Care. 1990;28:703723.

16.TL Saaty , LG Vargas . Models, methods, concepts & applications of the analytic hierarchy process. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2001.

18.J Townsend , M Buxton , G Harper . Prioritisation of health technology assessment. The PATHS model: Methods and case studies. Health Technol Assess. 2003;7:194.

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? *