ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2025
Methodological guidelines for Health Technology Assessment in Oman.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Policy dialogue on health technology assessment in Middle East and North Africa: reporting from an HTAi initiative.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
31 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Health Technology Assessment (HTA) supports optimal healthcare resource allocation by providing evidence-based input for decision-making. The manuscript aims to: (1) summarise the development process of methodological guidelines for Oman with involvement of key stakeholders to facilitate consistency, transparency and robustness in technology appraisal, and (2) present the features of the accepted HTA guidelines. Methods: Guideline development included five steps: (1) learnings from international HTA guidelines; (2) multistakeholder workshop on key components of the Omani methodological guidelines; (3) survey to facilitate consensus on most critical elements; (4) drafting the guidelines based on collected observations; and (5) validation through feedback from policy-makers and HTA experts. Results: The Omani HTA guidelines consist of six sections: target indication, medical assessment, economic evaluation, budget impact analysis, social and ethical considerations, and transparency. Health benefit evaluation should prioritise policy-relevant outcomes, including mortality, morbidity, and quality of life. Using clinical assessment reports published by reputable HTA agencies is advocated. When added value is demonstrated over a policy-relevant comparator, cost-utility analysis with QALYs calculation, a 3% discount rate, and cost-effectiveness thresholds is the preferred approach. Budget impact analysis should cover a four-year horizon. Full disclosure of conflicts of interest, expert contributions, and public availability of HTA dossiers are mandatory to enhance transparency. Conclusion: Acceptance of Omani HTA methodological guidelines by the Ministry of Health represent an important milestone in improving the evidence base of policy decisions in Oman. The guidelines offer a standardised, transparent framework to judge the value and affordability of health technologies in alignment with international standards and local healthcare needs and priorities.
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.