DEVELOPMENT OF A VALUE ASSESSMENT MODEL FOR SHARED CLINICIAN-PATIENT DECISION-MAKING ON ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS IN CHINA: A DELPHI STUDY
Author(s)
Hanrui Zheng, Master1, MING HU, PhD2.
1West China School of Pharmacy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China, 2Professor, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
1West China School of Pharmacy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China, 2Professor, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
OBJECTIVES: To construct a value assessment model for antineoplastic drugs that operationalizes shared decision-making between clinicians and patients, thereby providing a scientific and practical basis to inform clinical pharmacotherapy decisions.
METHODS: Candidate indicators were identified through a systematic literature review of existing oncology value frameworks. A two-round modified Delphi process was then conducted with a multidisciplinary expert panel comprising oncology clinicians, clinical pharmacists, and health administrators. In each round, panelists rated the candidate indicators on importance and indicators were iteratively refined based on predefined consensus criteria following each round.
RESULTS: The expert response rates were 80.95% in the first round and 100% in the second round. The authority coefficients of the panel were 0.90 and 0.93, respectively. Kendall's W tests yielded P-values of less than 0.001 in both rounds. The final value assessment index system comprises 8 domains and 19 subdomains, encompassing clinical benefit, safety, cost-effectiveness, accessibility, innovativeness, treatment convenience, and information completeness.
CONCLUSIONS: The developed model integrates empirical evidence with multi-stakeholder perspectives, offering a transparent, comprehensive, and adaptable framework. It is expected to support rational, patient-centered decision-making in antineoplastic therapy.
METHODS: Candidate indicators were identified through a systematic literature review of existing oncology value frameworks. A two-round modified Delphi process was then conducted with a multidisciplinary expert panel comprising oncology clinicians, clinical pharmacists, and health administrators. In each round, panelists rated the candidate indicators on importance and indicators were iteratively refined based on predefined consensus criteria following each round.
RESULTS: The expert response rates were 80.95% in the first round and 100% in the second round. The authority coefficients of the panel were 0.90 and 0.93, respectively. Kendall's W tests yielded P-values of less than 0.001 in both rounds. The final value assessment index system comprises 8 domains and 19 subdomains, encompassing clinical benefit, safety, cost-effectiveness, accessibility, innovativeness, treatment convenience, and information completeness.
CONCLUSIONS: The developed model integrates empirical evidence with multi-stakeholder perspectives, offering a transparent, comprehensive, and adaptable framework. It is expected to support rational, patient-centered decision-making in antineoplastic therapy.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-11, ISPOR Europe 2026, Vienna, Austria
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue 12S
Code
EE538
Topic
Economic Evaluation, Health Technology Assessment
Topic Subcategory
Value of Information
Disease
Oncology