PURPOSE: The evidence supporting decision-making is often restricted to studies that fully conform to the decision problem PICOS: i.e. on the specific population(P), intervention(I), comparators(C), and outcomes(O) of interest, and using robust study designs(S, e.g. RCTs). There are, however, many cases where extending the evidence base can strengthen decision-making. These include cases where the existing ‘direct’ evidence is limited (e.g. disconnected networks), complex (e.g. surrogate outcomes), or sparse (e.g. indications in children). Or may be motivated on the fact that the extended evidence plausibly retains relevance (e.g. the effectiveness of chemotherapy is judged similar across different types of solid tumors). Under such circumstances, evidence synthesis methods, potentially complemented with expert elicitation, can facilitate the sharing of information. These methods are already used in HTA, but haphazardly and with insufficient consideration for the impact that the methodology can have on the strength of sharing imposed. This workshop aims to introduce information-sharing methods and discuss with the audience opportunities and challenges of using these methods for decision making from a range of stakeholders’ perspectives.

DESCRIPTION:

This workshop will:

. introduce sharing-of-information methods in evidence synthesis and present a taxonomy of methods(Soares, 4 minutes)

. present exemplar applications:

-- sharing using structural dose-response models: case study on triptans for migraine(Pedder, 12 minutes)

-- sharing across study designs (RCTs and real world evidence) using bivariate NMA: case study on biologic therapies in rheumatoid arthritis(Bujkiewicz, 12 minutes)

. present an exploration of how alternative sharing-of-information methods compare using a case study on IVIG for sepsis(Nikolaidis, 12 minutes)

. structured audience discussion (with polling) on the expected opportunities and challenges of introducing information-sharing in decision-making(Soares, 20 minutes)

This workshop is aimed at all that those that participate in HTA, including decision makers and analysts. The panellists have extensive experience as decision makers and have authored technical methods guidance for HTA.