ISPOR is strongly committed to diversity. The Society’s Strategic Plan and core values embrace excellence through encouragement and acceptance of diverse ideas, cultures, and disciplines. Issue Panel submissions are encouraged from all stakeholders and are evaluated based on merit. ISPOR also aims to reflect the diversity of its membership in all endeavors and encourages consideration of diversity in abstract submissions. Diversity dimensions include (but not limited to) gender, career stage, ethnicity, race, education, sexual orientation, region/geographic location, physical disability, and religion. Additional information can be found at the Society’s Diversity Policy.
- ISPOR issue panels are designed to stimulate real debate on new or controversial topics in health economics and outcomes research or use of outcomes research in healthcare decision making.
- A successful issue panel will debate an important and/or timely HEOR issue. Each panelist is expected to provide a different perspective on the issue.
- To assure lively discussion, panelists should be from different institutions and/or work environments.
- Example of an Issue Panel session proposal submission is available here (downloadable PDF).
Issue panel submissions should be organized as follows:
STEP 1: GENERAL INFORMATION
- Acknowledgements: Submitting authors/submitters must agree to read and agree to ISPOR submission guidelines, ISPOR being an in-person only event, and AI-Assisted Content Disclosure.
- Title: Provide a title that accurately describes the issue and is framed as a question. The title should be in title case, 225 character limit (including spaces). Examples:
- Multi-Indication Pricing: Do We Want It? Can We Operationalize It?
- Designing a Patient-Centered Value Framework to Guide Shared Decision Making Oncology: Why, What, and How?
- Are Existing Health Technology Assessment Requirements Inadequate for Establishing Value for Potentially Transformative Gene Therapies?
- Submitter Email
- Subject of Debate: successful issue panel will debate an issue and have multiple perspectives represented by the panelists. Provide the question which will be the subject of the debate.
- ISPOR Guidance on the Use of AI-Assisted Technologies in Content: ISPOR has implemented guidance on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies in submission to the Society’s conferences. Submitting authors/submitters are required to disclose the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies in their submitted abstract(s) and/or accepted materials. Standard word processing spelling and grammar checks do not need to be disclosed.
- Joint Clinical Assessment/Scientific Advice in the EU Related Content: Given the ongoing development of the Joint Clinical Assessment process in the EU and the accompanying methods guidance, we anticipate that this will be a highly relevant topic at ISPOR. Similarly, Joint Scientific Consultations constitute an integral part of the EU HTA regulation and provide an opportunity to discuss the development plan to generate evidence to meet the needs of both regulators and HTA bodies with regards to pharmaceuticals and medical devices. Sessions specifically relevant to either the process or methods involved in these areas, especially the more controversial aspects, will be highlighted in our program.
- RWE Related Content: All topics are welcome, but we also encourage the submission around the topic of real-world evidence.
- Indicate if Submitter or Authors are Member(s) of an ISPOR Chapter
- Level of Difficulty: Indicate if this session is Introductory, Intermediate, or Advanced in nature.
STEP 2: TAXONOMY/TOPIC
Select the taxonomy/topic that best describes your session.
Clinician Reported Outcomes
Comparative Effectiveness or Efficacy
Clinician Outcomes Assessment
Relating Intermediate to Long-term Outcomes
Cost/Cost of Illness/Resource Use Studies
Budget Impact Analysis
Thresholds & Opportunity Cost
Trial-based economic evaluation
Work & Home Productivity - Indirect Costs
Value of Information
Novel & Social Elements of Value
Safety & Pharmacoepidemiology
Prevalence, Incidence, & Disease Risk Factors
Disease Classification & Coding
Approval & Labeling
Pricing Policy & Schemes
Reimbursement & Access Policy
Insurance Systems & National Health Care
Public Spending & National Health Expenditures
Coverage with Evidence Development & Adaptive Pathways
Health Disparities & Equity
Hospital and Clinical Practices
Pharmacist Interventions and Practices
Quality of Care Measurement
Treatment Patterns and Guidelines
Systems & Structure
Value Frameworks & Dossier Format
Decision & Deliberative Processes
Diagnostics & Imaging
Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Predictive Analytics
Confounding, Selection Bias Correction, Causal Inference
Modeling & Simulation
PRO & Related Methods
Adherence, Persistence, & Compliance
Stated Preference & Patient Satisfaction
Health State Utilities
Patient-reported Outcomes & Quality of Life Outcomes
Patient Behavior and Incentives
Instrument Development, Validation, & Translation
Academic & Educational
Best Research Practices
Geographic & Regional
Data Protection, Integrity, & Quality Assurance
Health & Insurance Records Systems
Distributed Data & Research Networks
Reproducibility & Replicability
Pragmatic Trials & Large Simple Trials
Prospective Observational Studies
Electronic Medical & Health Records
Administrative Claims Data
Surveys & Expert Panels
Decision Modeling & Simulation
Literature Review & Synthesis
Meta-analysis & Indirect Comparisons
STEP 3: LOCATION
What geographical region is this content about?
STEP 4: MODERATOR/PANELISTS
An issue panel is comprised of 1 moderator and a minimum of 2 and maximum of 3 panelists. All moderator/panelists will be asked to provide any previous, relevant speaking/publication experience.
- Moderators maintain communication with panelists and ISPOR staff regarding the development and delivery of the session.
- To assure lively debate, panelists should be from different institutions and/or work environments representing different perspectives on the debate.
- Panelists should present distinct views on the topic.
- Provide the names, degrees, positions, city, state, country and email addresses for the moderator/panelists.
- Panelist's Perspective: Provide a description of each panelist’s perspective on the debate topic.
- Example 1: Dr. Doe will discuss challenges in designing a patient-centered value framework, including addressing tensions between the societal and patient perspective. Ms. Roe will represent patient perspectives, offering insights from patient-centered research conducted by CancerCare. She will highlight factors important to cancer patients and approaches to collecting such information in clinical practice to support a customized patient-centered decision tool.
- Example 2: John Doe will argue that the development of open-source models is essential for cost-effectiveness analysis to be viewed as a reliable input to decision making and Jane Roe will argue that the impact on intellectual property rights, model “ownership”, oversite and, consequently, the incentives and resources available to develop and maintain models are prohibitive.
- You will be asked for full submitter information on this step as well. The submitter can be the same as the moderator or panelist.
STEP 5: ISSUE/OVERVIEW
- Length of Proposal (Issue and Overview): 300 words
- ISSUE: Provide a clear definition of the issue to be presented and debated.
- OVERVIEW: Provide background information and details on the material to be presented. Include speaker presentation length, e.g., 15 minutes, and state the allotted time to address the audience discussion and debate criterion. It is helpful to include which stakeholders will benefit from attending.
STEP 6: CONFIRMATION
Review your submission and complete the “Final Steps” acknowledgement form at the bottom. You must complete this final step and select “Conclude Submission,” otherwise your submission will be considered incomplete and not submitted for review. Please note: you will need to complete this step every time you update your submission.
CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF ISSUE PANELS
Overall, issue panel acceptance is based on the quality of the proposal/debate presented and the topic’s importance for inclusion and discussion in this conference’s scientific program.
Please consider the updated submission criteria when submitting your proposal:
Quality of content
- Educational value of the session
- Timeliness of the topic
- Applicability of content to HEOR practice or principles
- Effectiveness of incorporated active learning strategies
- The information/issue presented are novel or innovative
- Workshop proposals includes examples drawn from multiple sources
- Unbiased content that does not promote a product, service, or organization; abstracts deemed to be promotional will be excluded from consideration
Quality of proposal
- Plans for interactivity between the speakers and audience
- Proposal purpose/issue is clearly defined
- Issue panel proposals have more than one perspective identified
- The background information (included in the overview) is clear and concise
Quality of Speakers
- Expertise/experience of proposed speakers
- Proposed speakers represent diverse backgrounds (gender, geographic, institutional - refer to ISPOR Diversity policy) and perspectives (multiple organizations are represented)