Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

WHAT’S IN A NAME? DEVELOPING DEFINITIONS FOR COMMON HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT PRODUCT TYPES OF THE INTERNATIONAL NETWORK OF AGENCIES FOR HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT (INAHTA)

  • Tracy Merlin (a1), David Tamblyn (a1), Benjamin Ellery (a1) and the INAHTA Quality Assurance Group
Abstract

Objectives: A mapping exercise was undertaken to determine how HTA is being described and conducted across the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA), with the aim of harmonizing terminologies and approaches.

Methods: Three progressive surveys were undertaken. In 2010, INAHTA agencies were asked to provide details on all of their HTA products. In 2013, additional information was sought on key methodological characteristics of five of the most common HTA product types. Subsequently, final agreement was sought on three proposed product types.

Results: Forty-five HTA agencies responded to at least one of the surveys. In 2010, twenty-one agencies reported publishing over seventy named HTA products. Core domains associated with full HTA reports were reported by a third of agencies but were labeled differently, so products were classified according to product type (n = 17). Agencies producing short, tailored products increased between 2010 and 2013, with the publication of rapid reviews doubling from 33 percent to 66 percent. In 2013, half of the agencies adapted their common HTA products from documents produced by other agencies. A consensus (>70 percent) was achieved on definitions for HTA reports, mini-HTAs, and rapid reviews.

Conclusions: The product label for an HTA is not always indicative of its content. Terminology has, therefore, been agreed to make explicit the trade-off between rigor and timeliness in three common HTA product types. An INAHTA Product Type (IPT) Mark has been created to identify each of these. It is hoped this will further facilitate HTA adaptation between agencies and reduce duplication of effort.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      WHAT’S IN A NAME? DEVELOPING DEFINITIONS FOR COMMON HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT PRODUCT TYPES OF THE INTERNATIONAL NETWORK OF AGENCIES FOR HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT (INAHTA)
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      WHAT’S IN A NAME? DEVELOPING DEFINITIONS FOR COMMON HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT PRODUCT TYPES OF THE INTERNATIONAL NETWORK OF AGENCIES FOR HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT (INAHTA)
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      WHAT’S IN A NAME? DEVELOPING DEFINITIONS FOR COMMON HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT PRODUCT TYPES OF THE INTERNATIONAL NETWORK OF AGENCIES FOR HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT (INAHTA)
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
The online version of this article is published within an Open Access environment subject to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence <http://creativecommons.org/licences/by-nc-sa/3.0/>. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use.
References
Hide All
1. Hailey, D. Toward transparency in health technology assessment: A checklist for HTA reports. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2003;19:17.
2. Kristensen, FB, Lampe, K, Chase, DL, et al. Practical tools and methods for health technology assessment in Europe: Structures, methodologies, and tools developed by the European Network for Health Technology Assessment, EUnetHTA. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25 (Suppl 2):18.
3. Kristensen, FB, Makela, M, Neikter, SA, et al. European network for health technology assessment, EUnetHTA: Planning, development, and implementation of a sustainable European network for health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25 (Suppl 2):107116.
4. Milne, R. EUnetHTA HTA Adaptation toolkit & glossary [Internet]. NETSCC, NIHR Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre on behalf of the European Network for Health Technology Assessment; 2011.
5. Hutton, J, Trueman, P, Facey, K. Harmonization of evidence requirements for health technology assessment in reimbursement decision making. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24:511517.
6. Trueman, P, Hurry, M, Bending, M, Hutton, J. The feasibility of harmonizing health technology assessments across jurisdictions: A case study of drug eluting stents. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25:455462.
7. Busse, R, Orvain, J, Velasco, M, et al. Best practice in undertaking and reporting health technology assessments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2002;18:361422.
8. Andradas, E, Blasco, J-A, Valentin, B, Lopez-Pedraza, M-J, Garcia, F-J. Defining products for a new health technology assessment agency in Madrid, Spain: A survey of decision makers. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24:6069.
9. Danish Centre for Evaluation and Health Technology Assessment (DACEHTA), editor. Introduction to mini-HTA - a management and decision support tool for the hospital service. Copenhagen: National Board of Health; 2005.
10. Chandler, J, Churchill, R, Higgins, J, Lasserson, T, Tovey, D. Methodological standards for the conduct of new Cochrane Intervention Reviews. [Internet]. http://www.editorial-unit.cochrane.org/mecir (accessed December 8, 2011).
11. Mlika-Cabanne, N, Harbour, R, de Beer, H, Laurence, M, Cook, R, Twaddle, S; on behalf of the Guidelines International Network (G-I-N) Working Group on Evidence Tables. Sharing hard labour: Developing a standard template for data summaries in guideline development. BMJ Qual Saf. 2011;20:141145.
12. Hailey, D. A preliminary survey on the influence of rapid health technology assessments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25:415418.
13. Watt, A, Cameron, A, Sturm, L, et al. Rapid reviews versus full systematic reviews: An inventory of current methods and practice in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24:133139.
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

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary materials

Merlin Supplementary Material
Table 2

 Word (26 KB)
26 KB
WORD
Supplementary materials

Merlin Supplementary Material
Table 3

 Word (20 KB)
20 KB
WORD
Supplementary materials

Merlin Supplementary Material
Table 4

 Word (24 KB)
24 KB
WORD
Supplementary materials

Merlin Supplementary Material
Table 1

 Word (21 KB)
21 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed