ENHANCING TRANSPARENCY IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT APPRAISAL: DEVELOPMENT OF A CRITICAL APPRAISAL CHECKLIST FOR OMAN
Author(s)
Said Wani, BSc, MSc1, Raid Alsabiri, B.Pharm, MScc, MBA2, Asiya AL Kindi, BSc, MSc3, Alia Al Suhaily, BA, MBA4, Manal Alansari, BSc, MSc5, Sara Al Balushi, BSc, MSc5, Safiya Al Muaini, BSc, MSc5, Nadiya Al Bulushi, MSc2, Omar FASSEEH, Msc6, Ahmad Fasseeh, PhD6, Zoltán Kaló, PhD7.
1Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary, 2Ministry of Health - Oman, Muscat, Oman, 3Minsitry Of Health- Oman, Muscat, Oman, 4Ministry of health oman, Muscat, Oman, 5Ministry of Health - Oman, MUSCAT, Oman, 6Syreon Middle East, Alexandria, Egypt, 7Center for Health Technology Assessment, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
1Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary, 2Ministry of Health - Oman, Muscat, Oman, 3Minsitry Of Health- Oman, Muscat, Oman, 4Ministry of health oman, Muscat, Oman, 5Ministry of Health - Oman, MUSCAT, Oman, 6Syreon Middle East, Alexandria, Egypt, 7Center for Health Technology Assessment, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
OBJECTIVES: Health Technology Assessment (HTA) enhances healthcare decision-making by promoting transparency, efficiency, and evidence-based policies. However, poor appraisal practices can lead to misguided recommendations and inefficient resource utilization. This study aimed to develop a locally tailored HTA checklist for Oman to support a structured and transparent evaluation of submissions.
METHODS: The checklist was developed through a structured multi-phase process. First, a systematic literature review identified international HTA appraisal checklists. This review screened 1,255 records and fully reviewed 60 papers, which contributed to the first draft. Stakeholders’ involvement included selecting relevant questions, refining the wording, and ensuring consistency with national HTA guidelines. The next stakeholders workshop focused on developing the scoring system by applying SMART swing weighting to assign weights to domains and subdomains and to determine their relative importance. The final version was validated by decision-makers and experts to ensure practicality and relevance.
RESULTS: Oman’s critical appraisal checklist includes 89 questions spread across 18 subdomains, covering targeted indications, medical assessments, economic evaluations, budget impact analyses, transparency, and other aspects, following the approved methodological guidelines for health technology assessment in Oman. Economic evaluation carries the highest weight at 46.7%, followed by Medical Assessment and Target Indication at 31.1%, and Budget Impact Analysis at 22.2%. The final tool features structured dropdown grading, automated scoring, logic for “not applicable” responses, and AI-assisted reporting.
CONCLUSIONS: Oman’s HTA Critical Appraisal Checklist offers a structured tool to ensure consistent and transparent appraisal of HTA submissions. By combining weighted domain scoring, automated assessment, and AI-assisted reporting, the checklist helps reduce subjectivity and methodological variation in the appraisal process. Its development through stakeholder engagement supports its scientific validity, alignment with Oman’s HTA guidelines, and relevance to the national context. The checklist is expected to enhance transparency and the quality of HTA, increase accountability in decision, and promote evidence-informed health policy in Oman.
METHODS: The checklist was developed through a structured multi-phase process. First, a systematic literature review identified international HTA appraisal checklists. This review screened 1,255 records and fully reviewed 60 papers, which contributed to the first draft. Stakeholders’ involvement included selecting relevant questions, refining the wording, and ensuring consistency with national HTA guidelines. The next stakeholders workshop focused on developing the scoring system by applying SMART swing weighting to assign weights to domains and subdomains and to determine their relative importance. The final version was validated by decision-makers and experts to ensure practicality and relevance.
RESULTS: Oman’s critical appraisal checklist includes 89 questions spread across 18 subdomains, covering targeted indications, medical assessments, economic evaluations, budget impact analyses, transparency, and other aspects, following the approved methodological guidelines for health technology assessment in Oman. Economic evaluation carries the highest weight at 46.7%, followed by Medical Assessment and Target Indication at 31.1%, and Budget Impact Analysis at 22.2%. The final tool features structured dropdown grading, automated scoring, logic for “not applicable” responses, and AI-assisted reporting.
CONCLUSIONS: Oman’s HTA Critical Appraisal Checklist offers a structured tool to ensure consistent and transparent appraisal of HTA submissions. By combining weighted domain scoring, automated assessment, and AI-assisted reporting, the checklist helps reduce subjectivity and methodological variation in the appraisal process. Its development through stakeholder engagement supports its scientific validity, alignment with Oman’s HTA guidelines, and relevance to the national context. The checklist is expected to enhance transparency and the quality of HTA, increase accountability in decision, and promote evidence-informed health policy in Oman.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-11, ISPOR Europe 2026, Vienna, Austria
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue 12S
Code
HTA155
Topic
Health Policy & Regulatory, Health Technology Assessment, Organizational Practices
Topic Subcategory
Decision & Deliberative Processes, Systems & Structure
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas