CHOICE DEFINES VALUE- HOW TO ANALYSE AND DISSEMINATE EVIDENCE ON THE IMPORTANCE OF MULTIPLE CRITERIA FROM MULTIPLE PERSPECTIVES TO INFORM AN APPRAISAL PROCESS IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT
Author(s)
Benjamin M. Craig, PhD, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, USA; Juan Marcos Gonzalez, PhD, RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, USA; Axel Muehlbacher, PhD, Neubrandenburg University, Neubrandenburg, Germany; Juan Manuel Ramos Goñi, MSc, EuroQol Research Foundation, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Presentation Documents
PURPOSE: The paradigm shift in health technology assessment (HTA) towards including multiple perspectives can be fulfilled only when their views are systematically taken into account. To safeguard the public health, HTAs originally assessed health outcomes and relied on the judgment of professionals and policy makers concerning the trade-offs between benefits and risks. More recently, the focus has shifted toward the patient voice and addressing the problems of weighing multiple decision criteria, such as clinical efficacy, severe side effects and varying modes of administration. A key challenge in HTA is weighting multiple criteria from multiple perspectives to inform their decisions.
DESCRIPTION: At the 21st Annual International Meeting, the presenters gave a workshop on multi criteria decision analysis (MCDA). In complement to their didactic introduction, they conducted a live MCDA using hand-held response system and interpret its results in real time. The proposed workshop has 4 components. (1) Using the previous responses (paired comparison and best-worst scaling [BWS]), they will expand upon the first by demonstrating the analysis, interpretation and dissemination of the results Although conducting MCDA using audience responses has limitations and challenges, this analytical demonstration is clearly relevant and will serve to introduce a deliberative approach adaptable for multiple settings (e.g., expert panel, one-on-one interviews, online). (2) The audience will be given a hands-on exercise regarding the interpretation of MCDA results and the merits between methods (paired comparisons vs. BWS). (3) With this background, the presenters will introduce examples and open discussion to the audience to ask questions and express concerns regarding MCDA. (4) To aid the greater community, the responses and discussion will recorded, transcribed, de-identified, summarized and disseminated to ISPOR members (conditional on acceptance by ISPOR Spotlight) by the presenters. Through audience engagement and demonstration, the proposed workshop will give attendees a hands-on understanding of the underlying issues surrounding MCDA.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2016-10, ISPOR Europe 2016, Vienna, Austria
Code
W14
Topic
Health Technology Assessment, Methodological & Statistical Research