Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T09:05:06.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

USING BEST-WORST SCALING IN HORIZON SCANNING FOR HEPATOCELLULAR CARCINOMA TECHNOLOGIES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 September 2012

Gisselle Gallego ,
John F.P. Bridges ,
Terry Flynn ,
Barri M. Blauvelt  and
Louis W. Niessen
Gisselle Gallego
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health email: [email protected]
John F.P. Bridges
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
Terry Flynn
Affiliation:
University of Technology Sydney
Barri M. Blauvelt
Affiliation:
University of Massachusetts; Innovara, Inc.
Louis W. Niessen
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkinks Bloomberg School of Public Health; University of East Anglia and University of Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: There is a growing need for efficient procedures for identification of emerging technologies by horizon scanning systems. We demonstrate the value of best-worst scaling (BWS) in exploring clinicians’ views on emerging technologies that will impact outcomes in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the next 5 to 10 years.

Methods: Clinicians in Asia, Europe, and the United States were surveyed and their views about eleven emerging technologies relevant to HCC were explored using BWS (case 1). This involved systematically presenting respondents with subsets of five technologies and asking them to identify those that will have the most and least impact on HCC within 5 to 10 years. Statistical analysis was based on sequential best-worst and analyzed using conditional logistic regression.

Results: A total of 120 clinicians uniformly distributed across ten countries completed the survey (37 percent response rate). Respondents were predominately hepatologist (41 percent) who focused on HCC (65 percent) and had national influence in this field (39 percent). Respondents viewed molecular targeted therapy (p < .001) and early detection of HCC (p < .001) as having most potential, while improved surgical techniques (p < .001) and biopsy free HCC diagnostics (p < .001) were viewed upon negatively.

Conclusions: We demonstrate that BWS could be an important research tool to facilitate horizon scanning and HTA more broadly. Our research demonstrates the value of including clinicians’ preferences as a source of data in horizon scanning, but such methods could be used to incorporate the opinions of a broad array of stakeholders, including those in advocacy and public policy.

Keywords

Health technology assessmentLiver cancerPreferencesBest-worst scalingHorizon scanningHepatocellular Carcinoma
Type
THEME: EARLY AWARENESS AND ALERT (EAA) METHODS AND SYSTEMS
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 28 , Issue 3 , July 2012 , pp. 339 - 346
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

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

REFERENCES

1.Australia and New Zealand Horizon Scanning Network. Microwave ablation for hepatic tumours. Canberra: Department of Health and Ageing; 2008.Google Scholar
2.Bridges, JF, Gallego, G, Blauvelt, BM. Controlling liver cancer internationally: A qualitative study of clinicians’ perceptions of current public policy needs. Health Res Policy Syst. 2011;9:32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Bruix, J, Sherman, M. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology. 2005;42:1208–1236.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Douw, K, Vondeling, H. Selection of new health technologies for assessment aimed at informing decision making: A survey among horizon scanning systems. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2006;22:177–183.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Douw, K, Vondeling, H, Eskildsen, D, Simpson, S. Use of the Internet in scanning the horizon for new and emerging health technologies: A survey of agencies involved in horizon scanning. J Med Internet Res. 2003;5:e6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Douw, K, Vondeling, H, Oortwijn, W. Priority setting for horizon scanning of new health technologies in Denmark: Views of health care stakeholders and health economists. Health Policy. 2006;76:334–345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Finn, A, Louviere, JJ. Determining the appropriate response to evidence of public concern: The case of food safety. J Public Policy Marketing. 1992;11:12–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Freidlin, B, Korn, EL. Biomarker-adaptive clinical trial designs. Pharmacogenomics. 2010;11:1679–1682.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Ibargoyen-Roteta, N, Gutierrez-Ibarluzea, I, Benguria-Arrate, G, Galnares-Cordero, L, Asua, J. Differences in the identification process for new and emerging health technologies: Analysis of the EuroScan database. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25:367–373.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Lord, R, Suddle, A, Ross, PJ. Emerging strategies in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: The role of targeted therapies. Int J Clin Pract. 2011;65:182–188.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Louviere, J, Flynn, T. Using best-worst scaling choice experiments to measure public perceptions and preferences for healthcare reform in Australia. Patient. 2010;3;275–283.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Peng, XQ, Wang, F, Geng, X, Zhang, WM. Current advances in tumor proteomics and candidate biomarkers for hepatic cancer. Expert Rev Proteomics. 2009;6:551–561.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Robert, G, Gabbay, J, Stevens, A. Which are the best information sources for identifying emerging health care technologies? An international Delphi survey. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1998;14:636–643.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Kessels, R, Jones, B, Goos, P, Vandebroek, M. The usefulness of Bayesian optimal designs for discrete choice experiments. Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry. 2011;27:193–196.Google Scholar
15.Shariff, MI, Cox, IJ, Gomaa, AI, et al.Hepatocellular carcinoma: Current trends in worldwide epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis and therapeutics. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;3:353–367.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Simpson, S, Hiller, J, Gutierrez-Ibarluzea, I, et al.A toolkit for the identification and assessment of new and emerging health technologies. Birmingham: EuroScan; 2009:31.Google Scholar
17.Simpson, S, Packer, C, Carlsson, P, et al.Early identification and assessment of new and emerging health technologies: Actions, progress, and the future direction of an international collaboration–EuroScan. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24:518–525.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Stafinski, T, Topfer, LA, Zakariasen, K, Menon, D. The role of surgeons in identifying emerging technologies for health technology assessment. Can J Surg. 2010;53:86–92.Google ScholarPubMed
19.Street, D, Street, AP. Combinatorics of experimental design. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1987.Google Scholar
20.Torresi, J, Johnson, D, Wedemeyer, H. Progress in the development of preventive and therapeutic vaccines for hepatitis C virus. J Hepatol. 2011;54:1273–1285.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21.Wysocki, PJ. Targeted therapy of hepatocellular cancer. Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2010;19:265–274.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.Ye, SL, Takayama, T, Geschwind, J, Marrero, JA, Bronowicki, JP. Current approaches to the treatment of early hepatocellular carcinoma. Oncologist. 2010;15 (Suppl 4):34–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Zhu, AX. Systemic therapy of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: How hopeful should we be? Oncologist. 2006;11:790–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Gallego supplementary material

Gallego supplementary material

Download Gallego supplementary material(File)
File 79.9 KB