ArticleApplied health economics and health policy2026
A Mixed-Methods Assessment of India's Health Technology Assessment Ecosystem.
Article in Applied health economics and health policy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Incorporating economic considerations in clinical practice guideline development: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to evaluate the technical quality of health technology assessment (HTA) studies conducted in India. Second, we aim to identify process-related challenges across the life cycle of an HTA from commissioning to policy translation.
methodsA mixed-methods approach was employed to assess HTA studies conducted between 2018 and 2023 conducted by ten regional resource centers. The quantitative assessment involved reviewing 26 HTA reports using the Indian HTA Quality Appraisal Checklist. The qualitative component included semi-structured interviews with staff from six regional resource centers and the Health Technology Assessment in India secretariat to explore the processes of topic selection, study conduct, stakeholder engagement, and evidence to policy translation. Quantitative data were analyzed through scoring and categorization into quality ratings, while qualitative data were analyzed thematically using the framework method.
resultsIn the quantitative assessment, 14% (n = 3) of studies were found to be of excellent quality, 50% (n = 11) were deemed to be of good quality, 32% (n = 7) were of average quality, and only one (4%) of poor quality. The qualitative findings highlighted limited adherence to guidelines, challenges in framing the topic, and gaps in technical expertise for advanced analyses. Additionally, a high staff turnover, the need for better stakeholder consultations, and strategies to disseminate the evidence were also highlighted.
conclusionsThese findings emphasize the need for improvements in adherence to guidelines, transparency in topic selection, and alignment of HTA findings with policy needs. Investments in training, advanced methodology guidance, and systematic communication between researchers and policy makers are crucial to enhancing HTA's impact in India.
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.