ArticleInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2025
Engaging stakeholders along health technology assessment pathways: a scoping review of international practice.
Article in International journal of technology assessment in health care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Role of General Practitioners in European Health Technology Assessment, EU-HTA Innovation in Oncology as an Example.Journal of market access & health policy · 2026Article
- When Does Health Technology Assessment Need Deliberation? Evidence, Algorithms and the Limits of Consultation.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Review
- Integrating Equity in Topic Selection for Orphan Medicinal Products: Policy Implications for Health Technology Assessment in Rare Diseases.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Review
- Operationalising Inclusion for Participatory Design: Worked Examples for TRIPOD+AI & PROBAST+AI.Health services insights · 2026Article
- From product to knowledge: the life cycle of health technologies 2.0 as a framework for health system improvement.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- National HTA system in Canada: From system analysis and understanding to system strengthening.PLOS global public health · 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
objectivesHealth technology assessment (HTA) has been characterized as a complex adaptive system that centrally features stakeholder interactions. This article provides an overview of current practices in HTA stakeholder engagement concerning medicines.
methodsWe conducted a scoping review of English-language sources published between 2018 and 2023, including 66 peer-reviewed articles and 264 gray literature sources describing stakeholder involvement in HTA processes relating to medicines.
resultsIndustry is commonly permitted to provide a submission for funding, though the modes and time points of industry engagement are many. Clinician and patient engagement are regarded as especially important with increased intervention complexity and innovation. Stakeholder engagement is perhaps mostly conducted to enhance the collation and interpretation of evidence, not necessarily to increase the legitimacy of the HTA process or give stakeholders influence over a decision that affects them. Patients are mostly engaged through broader public consultation. Sometimes they work directly with other stakeholders. Problems with patient engagement include challenges with recruitment, time, and resource constraints. Stakeholder groups can also differ in how they view and prioritize public and patient engagement. Public engagement is often limited to a matter of transparency and public accountability, but the reasons to undertake public engagement are numerous and varied. They include gaining input on affordability or prioritization issues.
conclusionsHTA decision-making committees should commit to publicly communicating how they considered and made use of various stakeholder inputs. This could build trust and confidence in the committees and guide the public and patients on the information that committees find helpful.
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.