Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:53:14.443Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Expanding the scientific basis of health technology assessment: A research agenda for the next decade

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 August 2006

Renaldo N. Battista
Renaldo N. Battista
Affiliation:
University of Montreal
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: The complexity of health technology assessment (HTA) has increased, in part because of its evolution through three distinct phases: the machine, the clinical outcomes, and the delivery models. However, the theoretical foundation for the field remains underdeveloped.

Methods: It is high time for HTA to bring together aspects of conceptual and theoretical works from other fields to strengthen the foundation of HTA.

Results: Many challenges await the further development of HTA. They can be captured around three research themes: adapting HTA to an evolving analysis object; translating HTA results into policy, management, and practice decisions; and evaluating organizational models of HTA.

Conclusions: Consolidating the scientific basis of HTA is essential if we are to succeed in increasing the relevance of HTA in some of the most challenging health-related decisions that we will make as individuals and societies.

Keywords

Health technology assessmentScientific basisMethodological developmentsKnowledge transfer/translationModels of HTA practice
Type
GENERAL ESSAYS
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , July 2006 , pp. 275 - 280
Copyright
© 2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2003: Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research. A study of the impact of 2001-2002 health technology assessment products–final report. IP-15 Information Paper, 34.
Banta HD, Gelband H, Jonsson E, Battista RN. (guest editors). 1994; Health care technology and its assessment in eight countries: Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom, United States. Health Policy (special issue). 30: 1– 423.Google Scholar
Battista RN, Vineis P, Hodge MJ. 1995; Medicine, practice and guidelines: The uneasy juncture of science and art. J Clin Epidemiol. 48: 875– 880.Google Scholar
Battista RN, Hodge MJ. 1997: Putting the genome to work: Testing for genetic disease and implications for health services. In: The economic aspects of biotechnologies related to human health. Biotechnology and medical innovation: Socio-economic assessment of the technology, the potential and the products. Paris: OECD; 149– 231.
Battista RN, Hodge MJ. The evolving paradigm of health technology assessment: Reflections for the millennium. CMAJ. 1999; 160: 464– 1467.Google Scholar
Bero LA, Grilli R, Grimshaw JM, et al. 1998; Closing the gap between research and practice: An overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. BMJ. 317: 465– 468.Google Scholar
Blancquaert I, Cleret De Langavant G, Bouchard L, et al. 2001; L'encadrement du transfer! technologique en génétique moléculaire—Un défi à relever. ISUMA, Revue canadienne de recherche sur les politiques. 2: 95– 101.Google Scholar
Blancquaert I, Cleret De Langavant G, Bouchard L. 2002; L'évaluation des technologies de la santé à 1'ère de la génomique. Le défi de la complexité. Revue transdisciplinaire en santé-Ruptures. 9: 22– 38.Google Scholar
Coons SJ. 1996; Disease management: Definitions and exploration of ssues. Clin Ther. 18: 1321– 1326.Google Scholar
Davis DA, Taylor-Vaisey A. 1997; Translating guidelines into practice. CMAJ. 157: 408– 416.Google Scholar
Denis JL, Lehoux P, Champagne F. A knowledge utilization perspective on fine-tuning dissemination and contextualizing knowledge. In: Lemieux-Charles L, Champagne F, eds. Using knowledge and evidence in health care: Multidisciplinary perspectives. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; 2004: 18– 40.
Epstein RE, Sherwood LM. From outcomes research to disease management: A guide for the perplexed. Ann Intern Med. 1996; 124: 832– 837.Google Scholar
Gibbons M, Limoges C, Nowotny H. 1994. The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage;
Goering P, Butterill D, Jacobson N, et al. 2003; Linkage and exchange at the organizational level: A model of collaboration between research and policy. Health Serv Res Policy. 8: 14– 19.Google Scholar
Grimshaw JM, Russell IT. Effect of clinical guidelines on medical practice: A systematic review of rigorous evaluations. Lancet. 1993; 342: 1317– 1322.Google Scholar
Hailey D, Kristensen FB. The current status of the INAHTA project. Impact of HTA in Policy and Practice-The experiences of the INHTA Agencies. HTAi 2004 Pre-conference Workshop on Impact. Power Point Presentation. Available at: www.inahta.org/inahta-web/.
Hivon M, Lehoux P, Denis JL, et al. 2005; The use of health technology assessment (HTA) in decision-making: The coresponsibility of users and producers? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 21: 268– 275.Google Scholar
Jacob R, Me Gregor M. Assessing the impact of health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1997; 13: 68– 80.Google Scholar
Lavis JN, Ross SE, Hurley JE, et al. 2002; Examining the role of health services research in public policy-making. Milbank Q. 80: 125– 154.Google Scholar
Lavis JN, Robertson D, Woodside JM, et al. 2003; How can research organizations more effectively transfer research knowledge to decision makers? Milbank Q. 81: 221– 248.Google Scholar
Lomas J. Postcript: Understanding evidence-based decision-making—or why keyboards are irrational. In: Lemieux-Charles L, Champagne F, eds. Using knowledge and evidence in health care: Multidisciplinary perspectives. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; 2004: 258 p.
Luce BR, Brown RE. 1995; The use of technology assessment by hospitals, health maintenance organizations, and third-party payers in the United-States. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 11: 79– 92.Google Scholar
Montague T. 2004. Patients first-closing the health care gap in Canada. Canada: John Wiley & Sons Canada Ltd;
Murphy E, Dingwall R, Greatbatch D, Parker S, Watson P. 1998; Qualitative research methods in health technology assessment: A review of the literature. Health Technol Assess. 2: 1– 274.Google Scholar
Ross SE, Lavis JN, Rodriguez C, et al. 2003; Partnership experiences: Involving decision-makers in the research process. Health Serv Res Policy. 8: 26– 34.Google Scholar