ReviewInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2024
HTA community perspectives on the use of patient preference information: lessons learned from a survey with members of HTA bodies.
Review in International journal of technology assessment in health care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Two decades of impact: lessons from the HTAi Patient and Citizen Involvement in HTA Interest Group.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026Article
- What do HTA agencies need for generating health-related quality of life evidence? Findings from a global survey.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026Article
- Characteristics of published mini and rapid health technology assessments reports: a cross-sectional analysis.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026Article
- Controlling Symptoms versus Minimizing Negative Treatment Impact: A Grounded Theory Study of Heterogeneity in Patient Preferences for Psoriasis Treatments.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Preferences of people living with HIV for treatment regimen attributes: a qualitative interview study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Patient Preferences for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Treatment: A Multi-method Approach Using Discrete Choice Experiments and Best-Worst Scaling.The patient · 2025Article
- A Taxonomy for Assessing Whether HRQoL Value Sets Are Obsolete.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
- Exploring Patient Preference Information in Clinical Research and Decision Models: An Investigative Survey.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
- A genuine need or nice to have? Understanding HTA representatives' perspectives on the use of patient preference data.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This research sought to assess whether and how patient preference (PP) data are currently used within health technology assessment (HTA) bodies and affiliated organizations involved in technology/drug appraisals and assessments. An exploratory survey was developed by the PP Project Subcommittee of the HTA International Patient and Citizen Involvement Interest Group to gain insight into the use, impact, and role of PP data in HTA, as well as the perceived barriers to its incorporation. Forty members of HTA bodies and affiliated organizations from twelve countries completed the online survey. PP data were reported to be formally considered as part of the HTA evidence review process by 82.5 percent of the respondents, while 39.4 percent reported that most of the appraisals and assessments within their organization in the past year had submitted PP data. The leading reason for why PP data were not submitted in most assessments was time/resource constraints followed by lack of clarity on PP data impact. Participants reported that PP data had a moderate level of influence on the deliberative process and outcome of the decision, but a higher level of influence on the decision's quality. Most (81.8 percent) felt patient advocacy groups should be primarily responsible for generating and submitting this type of evidence. Insights from the survey confirm the use of PP data in HTA but reveal barriers to its broader and more meaningful integration. Encouragingly, participants believe obstacles can be overcome, paving the way for a second phase of research involving in-depth collaborative workshops with HTA representatives.
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.