OBJECTIVES

Understanding selection processes for data sources by value and health technology assessment (V/HTA) organizations is of importance as assessments produced by these bodies influence the coverage and reimbursement of medical products. Peer-reviewed publication is considered the gold standard in dissemination of scientific evidence. Our objective was to evaluate the published requirements and actual use of peer-reviewed evidence by V/HTA organizations, comparing practices across organizations for psoriasis disease repots.

METHODS

Methods documents from 3 HTA organizations (CADTH, ICER, NICE) were manually searched and abstracted for descriptions of requirements regarding search strategy and mentions of or requirements for peer-reviewed data sources. The bibliography of published psoriasis assessment reports for each organization was manually abstracted for types of data sources used. Two researchers classified each reference into one of the following categories: peer-reviewed journal, non-peer reviewed journal, government/regulatory, manufacturer-provided data, clinical guideline, or other. A third researcher acted as a tie-breaker when needed.

RESULTS

Methods documents for ICER explicitly referenced peer-reviewed publications, while CADTH and NICE did not. The psoriasis V/HTA reports from CADTH, ICER, and NICE documented 80, 227, and 75 references in total, respectively; 65% (52/80) of CADTH, 93% (211/227) of ICER, and 91% (68/75) of NICE references were from peer-reviewed sources. None of the references in any of the HTA reports were from non-peer-reviewed journals.

CONCLUSIONS

Heterogeneity exists among V/HTA organizations in requirements and/or guidance found in methods documentation regarding data source selection. Exclusive use of peer-reviewed data sources is not formally required by V/HTA organizations; however, it appears to be routine practice and the accepted standard.