ArticleInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2023
Health technology assessment of diagnostic tests: a state of the art review of methods guidance from international organizations.
Article in International journal of technology assessment in health care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evidence integration and bridging methodologies for high-risk and innovative medical devices andFrontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Patients offered genomic testing for rare disease and cancer: a real-world evaluation of impact and processes of care.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Impact ofFrontiers in public health · 2026Article
- PRICE: a personalized recursive intelligent cost effectiveness analysis framework for rare disease diagnosis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Beyond Accuracy: Methodological Advances for Assessing the Clinical Impact of Infectious Disease Diagnostics.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Links between accuracy and effectiveness of laboratory medicine equipment: use of the EUnetHTA core model to compare two analyzers by measuring HbA1c.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024Article
- Val (EU) xit: do we need an international ISPOR value flower?Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2024Article
- Article
- Evidence Synthesis and Linkage for Modelling the Cost-Effectiveness of Diagnostic Tests: Preliminary Good Practice Recommendations.Applied health economics and health policy · 2024Article
- Future Role of Health Technology Assessment for Genomic Medicine in Oncology: A Canadian Laboratory Perspective.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Review
- Real-world application of an integrated MCDA-economic framework in continence care technology: a hospital-based case study.Global & regional health technology assessmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo identify which international health technology assessment (HTA) agencies are undertaking evaluations of medical tests, summarize commonalities and differences in methodological approach, and highlight examples of good practice.
methodsA methodological review incorporating: systematic identification of HTA guidance documents mentioning evaluation of tests; identification of key contributing organizations and abstraction of approaches to all essential HTA steps; summary of similarities and differences between organizations; and identification of important emergent themes which define the current state of the art and frontiers where further development is needed.
resultsSeven key organizations were identified from 216 screened. The main themes were: elucidation of claims of test benefits; attitude to direct and indirect evidence of clinical effectiveness (including evidence linkage); searching; quality assessment; and health economic evaluation. With the exception of dealing with test accuracy data, approaches were largely based on general approaches to HTA with few test-specific modifications. Elucidation of test claims and attitude to direct and indirect evidence are where we identified the biggest dissimilarities in approach.
conclusionsThere is consensus on some aspects of HTA of tests, such as dealing with test accuracy, and examples of good practice which HTA organizations new to test evaluation can emulate. The focus on test accuracy contrasts with universal acknowledgment that it is not a sufficient evidence base for test evaluation. There are frontiers where methodological development is urgently required, notably integrating direct and indirect evidence and standardizing approaches to evidence linkage.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.