A MULTI-COUNTRY PAYER AND HTA EXPERT SURVEY EXAMINING HOW ACCESS DECISION-MAKERS NAVIGATE INFORMATION OVERLOAD AND EVOLVING EVIDENCE SOURCES
Author(s)
Ellie L.C. Dorsman, MBio1, Joshua H. Smith, MSc1, Laetitia Dewavrin, MBiochem1, Ryan Chapa, Level 6 Diploma2, James E. Harris, PhD3, Eddie J. Gibson, DPhil1.
1Wickenstones Ltd, Leek, United Kingdom, 2Techspert, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 3Wickenstones Ltd, Carlow, Ireland.
1Wickenstones Ltd, Leek, United Kingdom, 2Techspert, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 3Wickenstones Ltd, Carlow, Ireland.
OBJECTIVES: As the volume and diversity of evidence used in access decision making continue to increase, understanding which information sources decision-makers trust has become increasingly important. This study examined the evidence sources and decision-support tools used by HTA experts and payers, the level of trust assigned to each, and opportunities for manufacturers to improve the accessibility and credibility of submitted evidence.
METHODS: A survey of 25 HTA experts and payers was fielded in June 2026, covering five respondents from each of Germany, Japan and the UK, and 10 US payers, generating 700 individual data points. We explored which data sources were being used, trust scores for each source type, the role of decisions in other countries, and which information/formats aid effective decision making. In parallel, the same survey questions were run through a searchable dataset of 826 past NICE appraisals (https://nice.shoulde.rs).
RESULTS: In the last three appraisals conducted by respondents, a range of information sources were used alongside the manufacturer dossiers. Variability was seen in the level of trust assigned to these sources. This was reflected in the NICE dataset, where the most trusted evidence sources were peer-reviewed journals with follow up, while the least trusted were commercial evidence (including the dossier itself and conference presentations). Tools which can make interpretation easier included interactive budget impact models, clear scenario analyses, simple value calculators, clear assessment frameworks, utilization assumptions and evidence heatmaps. Participants also commented on which global authorities shaped their decision making, and the impact of overseas policy action, including most-favored nation.
CONCLUSIONS: Decision-maker use of information sources continues to evolve. Manufacturers have an opportunity to optimise presentation within submissions to improve trust in these documents, and should work with assessors to define common standards for quality across emerging evidence categories.
METHODS: A survey of 25 HTA experts and payers was fielded in June 2026, covering five respondents from each of Germany, Japan and the UK, and 10 US payers, generating 700 individual data points. We explored which data sources were being used, trust scores for each source type, the role of decisions in other countries, and which information/formats aid effective decision making. In parallel, the same survey questions were run through a searchable dataset of 826 past NICE appraisals (https://nice.shoulde.rs).
RESULTS: In the last three appraisals conducted by respondents, a range of information sources were used alongside the manufacturer dossiers. Variability was seen in the level of trust assigned to these sources. This was reflected in the NICE dataset, where the most trusted evidence sources were peer-reviewed journals with follow up, while the least trusted were commercial evidence (including the dossier itself and conference presentations). Tools which can make interpretation easier included interactive budget impact models, clear scenario analyses, simple value calculators, clear assessment frameworks, utilization assumptions and evidence heatmaps. Participants also commented on which global authorities shaped their decision making, and the impact of overseas policy action, including most-favored nation.
CONCLUSIONS: Decision-maker use of information sources continues to evolve. Manufacturers have an opportunity to optimise presentation within submissions to improve trust in these documents, and should work with assessors to define common standards for quality across emerging evidence categories.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-11, ISPOR Europe 2026, Vienna, Austria
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue 12S
Code
HTA214
Topic
Health Technology Assessment, Methodological & Statistical Research
Topic Subcategory
Decision & Deliberative Processes
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas