9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Incorporating MCDA into HTA: challenges and potential solutions, with a focus on lower income settings

      review-article
      1 , , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5
      Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation : C/E
      BioMed Central
      Priority Setting in Global Health Symposium
      5-6 October 2016
      Multicriteria decision analysis, Health technical assessment, Lower and middle-income countries

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) has the potential to bring more structure and transparency to health technology assessment (HTA). The objective of this paper is to highlight key methodological and practical challenges facing the use of MCDA for HTA, with a particular focus on lower and middle-income countries (LMICs), and to highlight potential solutions to these challenges.

          Methodological challenges

          Key lessons from existing applications of MCDA to HTA are summarized, including: that the socio-technical design of the MCDA reflect the local decision problem; the criteria set properties of additive models are understood and applied; and the alternative approaches for estimating opportunity cost, and the challenges with these approaches are understood.

          Practical challenges

          Existing efforts to implement HTA in LMICs suggest a number of lessons that can help overcome the practical challenges facing the implementation of MCDA in LMICs, including: adapting inputs from other settings and from expert opinion; investing in technical capacity; embedding the MCDA in the decision-making process; and ensuring that the MCDA design reflects local cultural and social factors.

          Conclusion

          MCDA has the potential to improve decision making in LMICs. For this potential to be achieved, it is important that the lessons from existing applications of MCDA are learned.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Priority setting of health interventions: the need for multi-criteria decision analysis

          Priority setting of health interventions is often ad-hoc and resources are not used to an optimal extent. Underlying problem is that multiple criteria play a role and decisions are complex. Interventions may be chosen to maximize general population health, to reduce health inequalities of disadvantaged or vulnerable groups, ad/or to respond to life-threatening situations, all with respect to practical and budgetary constraints. This is the type of problem that policy makers are typically bad at solving rationally, unaided. They tend to use heuristic or intuitive approaches to simplify complexity, and in the process, important information is ignored. Next, policy makers may select interventions for only political motives. This indicates the need for rational and transparent approaches to priority setting. Over the past decades, a number of approaches have been developed, including evidence-based medicine, burden of disease analyses, cost-effectiveness analyses, and equity analyses. However, these approaches concentrate on single criteria only, whereas in reality, policy makers need to make choices taking into account multiple criteria simultaneously. Moreover, they do not cover all criteria that are relevant to policy makers. Therefore, the development of a multi-criteria approach to priority setting is necessary, and this has indeed recently been identified as one of the most important issues in health system research. In other scientific disciplines, multi-criteria decision analysis is well developed, has gained widespread acceptance and is routinely used. This paper presents the main principles of multi-criteria decision analysis. There are only a very few applications to guide resource allocation decisions in health. We call for a shift away from present priority setting tools in health – that tend to focus on single criteria – towards transparent and systematic approaches that take into account all relevant criteria simultaneously.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Cost-Effectiveness Thresholds: the Past, the Present and the Future

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Towards a multi-criteria approach for priority setting: an application to Ghana.

              Many criteria have been proposed to guide priority setting in health, but their relative importance has not yet been determined in a way that allows a rank ordering of interventions. In an explorative study, a discrete choice experiment was carried out to determine the relative importance of different criteria in identifying priority interventions in Ghana. Thirty respondents chose between 12 pairs of scenarios that described interventions in terms of medical and non-medical criteria. Subsequently, a composite league table was constructed to rank order a set of interventions by mapping interventions on those criteria and considering the relative weights of different criteria. Interventions that are cost-effective, reduce poverty, target severe diseases, or target the young had a higher probability of being chosen than others. The composite league table showed that high priority interventions in Ghana are prevention of mother to child transmission in HIV/AIDS control, and treatment of pneumonia and diarrhoea in childhood. Low priority interventions are certain interventions to control blood pressure, tobacco and alcohol abuse. The composite league table lead to a different and more differentiated rank ordering of interventions compared to pure efficiency ratings. This explorative study has introduced a multi-criteria approach to priority setting. It has shown the feasibility of accounting for efficiency, equity and other societal concerns in prioritization decisions, and its potentially large impact on priority setting.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                kevin.marsh@evidera.com
                p.thokala@sheffield.ac.uk
                sitaporn.you@mahidol.edu
                kchalkidou@cgdev.org
                Conference
                Cost Eff Resour Alloc
                Cost Eff Resour Alloc
                Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation : C/E
                BioMed Central (London )
                1478-7547
                9 November 2018
                9 November 2018
                2018
                : 16
                Issue : Suppl 1 Issue sponsor : Publication of this supplement has been supported by sponsorship from Mark O’Friel, the Brinson Foundation, and the Payne Family Foundation. Information about the source of funding for publication charges can be found in the individual articles. The articles have undergone the journal's standard peer review process for supplements. DEB and RD are authors of an article submitted in this supplement. Both confirm that they were not part of the review process for their manuscript.
                : 43
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Patient Centred Research, Evidera, London, UK
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9262, GRID grid.11835.3e, ScHARR, University of Sheffield, ; Sheffield, UK
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1937 0490, GRID grid.10223.32, Faculty of Pharmacy, , Mahidol University, ; Bangkok, Thailand
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2113 8111, GRID grid.7445.2, School of Public Health, , Imperial College, ; London, UK
                [5 ]Center for Global Development, London, UK
                Article
                125
                10.1186/s12962-018-0125-8
                6225551
                b7eeef85-b453-4d89-ab01-30ee130a0703
                © The Author(s) 2018

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                Priority Setting in Global Health Symposium
                Boston, MA, USA
                5-6 October 2016
                History
                Categories
                Review
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2018

                Public health
                multicriteria decision analysis,health technical assessment,lower and middle-income countries

                Comments

                Comment on this article