OBJECTIVES: To understand if criteria used in a MultiCriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) framework developed by oncology patient associations from patient perspective would be used by non-oncology patient association to increase patient empowerment in value assessment of health technologies.

METHODS: A group of 8 patient representatives from stroke, cardiovascular, inflammatory disease, neuromuscular, migraine, Chron disease and hepatic diseases belonging to Spanish Patient Platform assessed first the criteria used in the first study in terms of adequacy of the criteria included in the framework (n=8). After that, criteria were weighted using same methodology in a hierarchical 5-point scale. A MCDA manual was used to train patients before the weighting exercise. An analysis of weights from both studies was done to assess possible differences in the ratings.

RESULTS: All criteria were considered important and no additional items or changes were suggested. There were slight differences in weights which did not affect the rank order of the importance of the criteria. Thus, results were combined to obtain Spanish reference values from patient perspective (n=16). The criteria of "Disease severity" and "Comparison of patient reported outcomes" were the most important (4.6 out of 5) and "Use of medical and non-medical resources", "Therapeutic innovation" and “Priority population and access”, were the less important with 2.9, 3,1 and 3,3 respectively. The criterion that lead to a greater discussion was "Priority population and access” because there were different views about if we have to prioritize based on the type of the population.

CONCLUSIONS: We obtained a preliminary set of values that can be used as reference values when patient associations are using the developed MCDA framework to assess new health technologies from patient perspective. Weights and ranking of importance are quite consistent among patient association representatives across diseases.