ReviewApplied health economics and health policy2026
Integrating Equity in Topic Selection for Orphan Medicinal Products: Policy Implications for Health Technology Assessment in Rare Diseases.
Review 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Health technology assessment (HTA) informs evidence-based decision-making for resource allocation in healthcare; however, the topic selection phase that determines which technologies proceed to full assessment is underexplored and often lacks fairness and transparency, particularly disadvantaging orphan medicinal products (OMPs) for rare diseases. We drew on selectively identified literature and illustrative HTA experiences to advance an opinion-driven argument about equity in topic selection for OMPs, grouping insights into three domains: structural challenges, conceptual frameworks and policy strategies. Structural barriers in topic selection include a lack of institutionalised, participatory processes, overreliance on prioritisation criteria implicitly aligned with population-wide impact and minimal engagement with stakeholders representing the rare disease community, resulting in the systematic under-prioritisation of OMPs. Procedural and value frameworks, including multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), evidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs), accountability for reasonableness (A4R), equity weighting and Health Equity Impact Assessment (HEIA), can help agencies incorporate social value and fairness before formal appraisal, but remain unevenly operationalised. Policy strategies such as equity-oriented horizon scanning, open nomination systems, and special pathways for OMPs are highlighted as feasible approaches to promote fairness. Achieving equity in HTA topic selection for OMPs requires both policy and cultural change, and embedding pluralistic value frameworks, engaging stakeholders and adopting specific policy tools are essential steps towards ensuring that rarity is met with heightened ethical attention rather than exclusion.
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.