Multi-criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment: addressing methodological challenges to improve the state of the art

被引:40
作者
Oliveira, Monica D. [1 ]
Mataloto, Ines [1 ]
Kanavos, Panos [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Lisbon, CEG IST, Ave Rovisco Pais, P-1049001 Lisbon, Portugal
[2] LSE Hlth London Sch Econ & Polit Sci, Dept Hlth Policy & Med Technol, Res Grp, Houghton St, London WC2A 2AE, England
关键词
Multi-criteria decision analysis; Health technology assessment; Systematic review; Methodological quality; Methodological challenges; MCDA modelling; BENEFIT-RISK ASSESSMENT; ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS; ANALYSIS MCDA; RESOURCE-ALLOCATION; MEDICAL DEVICES; ECONOMIC-EVALUATION; RARE DISEASES; PATIENT PREFERENCES; EVIDEM FRAMEWORK; INCOME COUNTRIES;
D O I
10.1007/s10198-019-01052-3
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Background Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) concepts, models and tools have been used increasingly in health technology assessment (HTA), with several studies pointing out practical and theoretical issues related to its use. This study provides a critical review of published studies on MCDA in the context of HTA by assessing their methodological quality and summarising methodological challenges. Methods A systematic review was conducted to identify studies discussing, developing or reviewing the use of MCDA in HTA using aggregation approaches. Studies were classified according to publication time and type, country of study, technology type and study type. The PROACTIVE-S approach was constructed and used to analyse methodological quality. Challenges and limitations reported in eligible studies were collected and summarised; this was followed by a critical discussion on research requirements to address the identified challenges. Results 129 journal articles were eligible for review, 56% of which were published in 2015-2017; 42% focused on pharmaceuticals; 36, 26 and 18% reported model applications, issues regarding MCDA implementation analyses, and proposing frameworks, respectively. Poor compliance with good methodological practice (<25% complying studies) was found regarding behavioural analyses, discussion of model assumptions and uncertainties, modelling of value functions, and dealing with judgment inconsistencies. The five most reported challenges related to evidence and data synthesis; value system differences and participant selection issues; participant difficulties; methodological complexity and resource balance; and criteria and attributes modelling. A critical discussion on ways to address these challenges ensues. Discussion Results highlight the need for advancement in robust methodologies, procedures and tools to improve methodological quality of MCDA in HTA studies. Research pathways include developing new model features, good practice guidelines, technologies to enable participation and behavioural research.
引用
收藏
页码:891 / 918
页数:28
相关论文
共 50 条
[41]   Multi-criteria decision analysis as a tool for evaluation of unmet needs in health care [J].
Araja, Diana .
6TH INTERNATIONAL INTERDISCIPLINARY SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCE SOCIETY. HEALTH. WELFARE, PT II, 2018, 51
[42]   Multi-criteria decision analysis to prioritize health interventions: Capitalizing on first experiences [J].
Baltussen, Rob ;
Youngkong, Sitapon ;
Paolucci, Francesco ;
Niessen, Louis .
HEALTH POLICY, 2010, 96 (03) :262-264
[43]   A multi-criteria decision analysis perspective on the health economic evaluation of medical interventions [J].
Douwe Postmus ;
Tommi Tervonen ;
Gert van Valkenhoef ;
Hans L. Hillege ;
Erik Buskens .
The European Journal of Health Economics, 2014, 15 :709-716
[44]   BROADER ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF DISEASE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS USING MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS [J].
Tsiachristas, Apostolos ;
Cramm, Jane Murray ;
Nieboer, Anna ;
Rutten-van Molken, Maureen .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2013, 29 (03) :301-308
[45]   A Review and Classification of Approaches for Dealing with Uncertainty in Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Healthcare Decisions [J].
Broekhuizen, Henk ;
Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Catharina G. M. ;
van Til, Janine A. ;
Hummel, J. Marjan ;
IJzerman, Maarten J. .
PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2015, 33 (05) :445-455
[46]   Fuzzy multi-criteria acceptability analysis: A new approach to multi-criteria decision analysis under fuzzy environment [J].
Yatsalo, Boris ;
Korobov, Alexander ;
Martinez, L. .
EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, 2017, 84 :262-271
[47]   Floating photovoltaic technology definition aided with multi-criteria decision analysis: a case study [J].
Di Grazia, Salvatore ;
Tina, Giuseppe Marco .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, 2022, 41 (11) :1938-1957
[48]   Multi-criteria decision analysis for the assessment of non-clinical hospital services: Methodology and case study [J].
Lasorsa, Irene ;
Padoano, Elio ;
Marceglia, Sara ;
Accardo, Agostino .
OPERATIONS RESEARCH FOR HEALTH CARE, 2019, 23
[49]   Transparent prioritisation, budgeting and resource allocation with multi-criteria decision analysis and decision conferencing [J].
Lawrence D. Phillips ;
Carlos A. Bana e Costa .
Annals of Operations Research, 2007, 154 :51-68
[50]   Transparent prioritisation, budgeting and resource allocation with multi-criteria decision analysis and decision conferencing [J].
Phillips, Lawrence D. ;
Bana E Costa, Carlos A. .
ANNALS OF OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 2007, 154 (01) :51-68