Value-based assessment of new medical technologies: towards a robust methodological framework for the application of multiple criteria decision analysis in the context of health technology assessment

Angelis, Aris ORCID: 0000-0002-0261-4634 and Kanavos, Panos ORCID: 0000-0001-9518-3089 (2016) Value-based assessment of new medical technologies: towards a robust methodological framework for the application of multiple criteria decision analysis in the context of health technology assessment. PharmacoEconomics, 34 (5). pp. 435-446. ISSN 1170-7690

Preview

PDF - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial. Download (1MB) | Preview

• Author

Abstract

In recent years, multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) has emerged as a likely alternative to address shortcomings in health technology assessment (HTA) by offering a more holistic perspective to value assessment and acting as an alternative priority setting tool. In this paper, we argue that MCDA needs to subscribe to robust methodological processes related to the selection of objectives, criteria and attributes in order to be meaningful in the context of healthcare decision making and fulfil its role in value-based assessment (VBA). We propose a methodological process, based on multi-attribute value theory (MAVT) methods comprising five distinct phases, outline the stages involved in each phase and discuss their relevance in the HTA process. Importantly, criteria and attributes need to satisfy a set of desired properties, otherwise the outcome of the analysis can produce spurious results and misleading recommendations. Assuming the methodological process we propose is adhered to, the application of MCDA presents three very distinct advantages to decision makers in the context of HTA and VBA: first, it acts as an instrument for eliciting preferences on the performance of alternative options across a wider set of explicit criteria, leading to a more complete assessment of value; second, it allows the elicitation of preferences across the criteria themselves to reflect differences in their relative importance; and, third, the entire process of preference elicitation can be informed by direct stakeholder engagement, and can therefore reflect their own preferences. All features are fully transparent and facilitate decision making.

Item Type:	Article
Official URL:	http://link.springer.com/
Additional Information:	© 2016 The Authors
Divisions:	Social Policy LSE Health
Subjects:	H Social Sciences > HB Economic Theory
Date Deposited:	26 Jan 2016 11:46
Last Modified:	25 Apr 2024 00:54
Projects:	Advance-HTA
Funders:	European Commission, DG Research
URI:	http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/65148

Actions (login required)

View Item