Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Choosing health technology assessment and systematic review topics: the development of priority-setting criteria for patients' and consumers' interests.
Bastian, Hilda; Scheibler, Fülöp; Knelangen, Marco; Zschorlich, Beate; Nasser, Mona; Waltering, Andreas.
Afiliação
  • Bastian H; National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, 8600 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, Maryland 20894, USA. hilda.bastian@nih.gov
Int J Technol Assess Health Care ; 27(4): 348-56, 2011 Oct.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22004776
BACKGROUND: The Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) was established in 2003 by the German parliament. Its legislative responsibilities are health technology assessment, mostly to support policy making and reimbursement decisions. It also has a mandate to serve patients' interests directly, by assessing and communicating evidence for the general public. OBJECTIVES: To develop a priority-setting framework based on the interests of patients and the general public. METHODS: A theoretical framework for priority setting from a patient/consumer perspective was developed. The process of development began with a poll to determine level of lay and health professional interest in the conclusions of 124 systematic reviews (194 responses). Data sources to identify patients' and consumers' information needs and interests were identified. RESULTS: IQWiG's theoretical framework encompasses criteria for quality of evidence and interest, as well as being explicit about editorial considerations, including potential for harm. Dimensions of "patient interest" were identified, such as patients' concerns, information seeking, and use. Rather than being a single item capable of measurement by one means, the concept of "patients' interests" requires consideration of data and opinions from various sources. CONCLUSIONS: The best evidence to communicate to patients/consumers is right, relevant and likely to be considered interesting and/or important to the people affected. What is likely to be interesting for the community generally is sufficient evidence for a concrete conclusion, in a common condition. More research is needed on characteristics of information that interest patients and consumers, methods of evaluating the effectiveness of priority setting, and methods to determine priorities for disinvestment.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Avaliação da Tecnologia Biomédica / Participação da Comunidade / Revisões Sistemáticas como Assunto / Prioridades em Saúde Tipo de estudo: Health_technology_assessment / Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans País/Região como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: Int J Technol Assess Health Care Assunto da revista: PESQUISA EM SERVICOS DE SAUDE Ano de publicação: 2011 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos País de publicação: Reino Unido

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Avaliação da Tecnologia Biomédica / Participação da Comunidade / Revisões Sistemáticas como Assunto / Prioridades em Saúde Tipo de estudo: Health_technology_assessment / Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans País/Região como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: Int J Technol Assess Health Care Assunto da revista: PESQUISA EM SERVICOS DE SAUDE Ano de publicação: 2011 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos País de publicação: Reino Unido