Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41246096›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2025

A comparative analysis of patient participation in health technology assessment systems worldwide: trends and practices.

Marcos Puebla, Luis Korrodi-Gregório, Luca Trentin, Annabel De Maria, Nerea Blanqué

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Marcos PueblaAlira Health SLU, Barcelona, Spain.
Luis Korrodi-GregórioAlira Health SLU, Barcelona, Spain.
Luca TrentinAlira Health Srl, Milan, Italy.
Annabel De MariaAlira Health SLU, Barcelona, Spain.
Nerea BlanquéAlira Health SLU, Barcelona, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Over the last decades, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) has become pivotal in guiding decision-making concerning the inclusion of new health technologies in health systems worldwide. As HTA continues to evolve, the importance of patient participation to achieve a more informed, transparent, and legitimate decision-making process has gained increased recognition. Yet practices vary widely and are often modest in scope. Methods: We conducted a comparison and ranking of 56 HTA systems across five regions based on levels of patient participation throughout the HTA process. Participation was measured by applying a scoring framework we developed to publicly available information for each system. Results: Many HTA systems include patient participation, but the level of involvement shows substantial variation across systems and tends to be comparatively modest. Some systems demonstrate active engagement throughout the process, while others show limited participation. Discussion: To our knowledge, this is the first attempt to quantify patient participation on a wider scale to enable comparisons across a large sample of HTA systems. The findings offer policymakers, healthcare professionals, patients, and researchers a comprehensive view of current approaches and highlight opportunities to enhance patient involvement in HTA.

Indexed as

Patient ParticipationTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalDecision MakingGlobal HealthHumanshealth technologyhealth technology assessment (HTA)patient engagement (PE)patient involvementpatient participationpublic involvement

Identifiers

PMID41246096
PMCPMC12615383

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.