7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Road toward institutionalizing health technology assessment in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi: The role of evidence-informed deliberative processes

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          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

          Objective

          This paper reports on the process used to embark on one of the core strategies of Abu Dhabi’s Department of Health, which was to develop a roadmap for HTA implementation and institutionalization, based on the aspirations and needs of local stakeholders and making use of the evidence-informed deliberative processes framework. The paper also highlights the main features of the road map that may be expected to address some of the current challenges.

          Methods

          A series of activities were undertaken that informed the subsequent development of the roadmap. They comprised a situation analysis using a combination of desk research and semistructured (group) interviews with 45 stakeholders. The findings were discussed in two workshops; face-to-face with nonindustry stakeholders from Abu Dhabi, and online with industry representatives.

          Results

          Guided by the EDP framework, the roadmap provides instructions how to organize stakeholder involvement, how to identify and operationalize decision criteria, and how to ensure that the decision-making process is transparent. Specific guidance is given on establishing an HTA structure with an appropriate policy framework, the formulation of an HTA program, a communication strategy, as well as building and leveraging HTA expertise.

          Conclusion

          Broad stakeholder consultation has been instrumental toward the establishment of a comprehensive HTA framework in Abu Dhabi, and the development of a road map. The interest raised during stakeholder consultations and the commitments made hold promise for the adoption and establishment of EDP principles to support HTA in Abu Dhabi that have potential to contribute to a sustainable high-quality healthcare system.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

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

          The new definition of health technology assessment: A milestone in international collaboration

          An international joint task group co-led by the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) and Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) has developed a new and internationally accepted definition of HTA. The task group, consisting of representatives of leading HTA networks, societies and global organizations, developed guiding principles for the process and followed an established consultation plan with the broader HTA community to develop the definition. The consensus achieved by the international joint task group brings the collective weight of the participating networks, societies, and organizations behind the new definition. The new definition of HTA is an historic achievement and it is offered to the current and emerging HTA world as a cornerstone reference for today and into the future.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A new taxonomy for stakeholder engagement in patient-centered outcomes research.

            Despite widespread agreement that stakeholder engagement is needed in patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR), no taxonomy exists to guide researchers and policy makers on how to address this need. We followed an iterative process, including several stages of stakeholder review, to address three questions: (1) Who are the stakeholders in PCOR? (2) What roles and responsibilities can stakeholders have in PCOR? (3) How can researchers start engaging stakeholders? We introduce a flexible taxonomy called the 7Ps of Stakeholder Engagement and Six Stages of Research for identifying stakeholders and developing engagement strategies across the full spectrum of research activities. The path toward engagement will not be uniform across every research program, but this taxonomy offers a common starting point and a flexible approach.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Priority Setting for Universal Health Coverage: We Need Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes, Not Just More Evidence on Cost-Effectiveness

              Priority setting of health interventions is generally considered as a valuable approach to support low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in their strive for universal health coverage (UHC). However, present initiatives on priority setting are mainly geared towards the development of more cost-effectiveness information, and this evidence does not sufficiently support countries to make optimal choices. The reason is that priority setting is in reality a value-laden political process in which multiple criteria beyond cost-effectiveness are important, and stakeholders often justifiably disagree about the relative importance of these criteria. Here, we propose the use of ‘evidence-informed deliberative processes’ as an approach that does explicitly recognise priority setting as a political process and an intrinsically complex task. In these processes, deliberation between stakeholders is crucial to identify, reflect and learn about the meaning and importance of values, informed by evidence on these values. Such processes then result in the use of a broader range of explicit criteria that can be seen as the product of both international learning (‘core’ criteria, which include eg, cost-effectiveness, priority to the worse off, and financial protection) and learning among local stakeholders (‘contextual’ criteria). We believe that, with these evidence-informed deliberative processes in place, priority setting can provide a more meaningful contribution to achieving UHC.

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Technol Assess Health Care
                Int J Technol Assess Health Care
                THC
                International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
                Cambridge University Press (New York, USA )
                0266-4623
                1471-6348
                2024
                18 December 2024
                : 40
                : 1
                : e80
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Radboud University Medical Centre , Nijmegen, The Netherlands
                [ 2 ] Abu Dhabi Department of Health , United Arab Emirates
                Author notes
                Corresponding author: Leon Bijlmakers, Email: leon.bijlmakers@ 123456radboudumc.nl
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2252-0579
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4499-8602
                Article
                S0266462324004744
                10.1017/S0266462324004744
                11703617
                39690753
                f70d492c-d2b5-4008-b207-b32b75cbf90c
                © The Author(s) 2024

                This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.

                History
                : 20 February 2024
                : 26 September 2024
                : 04 November 2024
                Page count
                References: 34, Pages: 6
                Categories
                Policy

                Health & Social care
                health technology assessment,abu dhabi,evidence-informed deliberative processes,institutionalization

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log