Plain Language Summary

What is it about? Current guidelines for evaluating the value of health technologies and their cost-effectiveness often overlook the patient's perspective. This study highlights the importance of making these assessments more patient-centered, as traditional methods focus mainly on clinical data and financial outcomes for healthcare providers. The problem addressed is the lack of consideration for patient experiences in these evaluations, which can lead to an incomplete understanding of the true impact of healthcare interventions on patients and their families. The article fills the knowledge gap by proposing a set of recommendations developed through consensus among various stakeholders, including patients, to guide more patient-centered value assessments. This study contributes significantly by suggesting methods to incorporate patient experiences and needs into healthcare evaluations, ensuring they reflect real-world impacts.

How was the research conducted? The study was guided by an approach that emphasizes gathering diverse opinions to reach a consensus. Initially, listening sessions were conducted with patient group representatives to understand their priorities. These insights informed interviews with health economists, which led to the creation of an eDelphi survey. This survey was used to gather opinions from a wide range of stakeholders. The researchers conducted qualitative interviews and a structured survey to obtain feedback and achieve consensus on the recommendations. The subjects of this study included patient representatives, health economists, and other healthcare stakeholders. This method was chosen to ensure that the recommendations are comprehensive and consider multiple perspectives.

What were the results? The main finding is that 28 statements, reflecting recommendations for patient-centered assessments, were agreed upon by more than 80% of the participants, highlighting the need for data that includes patient impacts both within and outside the healthcare sector. Other important findings include the consensus on the importance of involving patients throughout the assessment process and the need for clear communication of results in plain language. A surprising finding was the disagreement on financial support for patient involvement in the assessment process and the openness of data models.

Why are the results important? These results are significant as they highlight the necessity for healthcare evaluations that truly reflect patient experiences, which can lead to more accurate and effective healthcare decisions. Such findings could change clinical practices by ensuring that patient needs and outcomes are prioritized, leading to more holistic healthcare delivery. Patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers would benefit from these findings as they offer a more comprehensive understanding of healthcare technology impacts. In the long-term, these recommendations could lead to more inclusive and transparent healthcare assessments, ultimately improving healthcare delivery and policy development.

What are the strengths and weaknesses of this study? A major strength of this study is its inclusive approach, engaging a diverse range of stakeholders to reach a consensus on patient-centered recommendations. However, a limitation is the lack of global representation, as the study primarily involved North American participants, which may affect the generalizability of the findings. Future research could explore similar consensus-building approaches in different geographical contexts to further validate and expand upon these recommendations.

Note: This content was created with assistance from artificial intelligence (AI) and has been reviewed and edited by ISPOR staff. For more information or for inquiries on ISPOR’s AI policy, click here or contact us at info@ispor.org.