OBJECTIVES: Clinical expert opinion can be used in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) submissions to inform economic models. Elicitation exercises should be well-designed to minimise bias and be reported with transparency. The National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics (NCPE) Applicant Submission Template outlines key elements to be reported. These include: details/number(s) of experts, potential conflicts of interest (COIs) and methods used to collect and analyse opinions.

METHODS: All HTA submissions made to the NCPE between July 2019 and June 2020 inclusive were reviewed in order to determine compliance with the NCPE Applicant Submission Template and to explore if clinical expert opinion had been used to inform assumptions in the economic models.

RESULTS: A total of 18 HTA submissions were reviewed. Clinical opinion was used in all. The median number of experts per HTA was seven (range 1 to 33); the majority were hospital physicians (85%). Most remained anonymous (78%). Individual (per-person) elicitation exercises occurred in 16 (89%). Deficiencies related to the provision of potential COI declarations were identified in 12 (67%). In some submissions, clinical expert responses were missing partly (n=6, 33%) or entirely (n=1, 6%). The most common assumptions in economic models informed by clinical opinion were related to comparators (n=15, 83%), resource use (n=15, 83%), budget impact (n=15, 83%) and treatment effectiveness (n=9, 50%). Other assumptions included the use of subsequent therapies (n=8, 44%), use of the intervention (n=7, 39%), utilities (n=5, 28%) and the model population (n=5, 28%).

CONCLUSIONS: All HTA submissions evaluated used expert opinion to inform economic model assumptions. Compliance with recommendations on reporting is variable. Transparency in reporting of clinical opinion by companies, including declarations of potential conflict of interests, is essential.