Multi-criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment: addressing methodological challenges to improve the state of the art

被引:40
|
作者
Oliveira, Monica D. [1 ]
Mataloto, Ines [1 ]
Kanavos, Panos [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Lisbon, CEG IST, Ave Rovisco Pais, P-1049001 Lisbon, Portugal
[2] LSE Hlth London Sch Econ & Polit Sci, Dept Hlth Policy & Med Technol, Res Grp, Houghton St, London WC2A 2AE, England
来源
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS | 2019年 / 20卷 / 06期
关键词
Multi-criteria decision analysis; Health technology assessment; Systematic review; Methodological quality; Methodological challenges; MCDA modelling; BENEFIT-RISK ASSESSMENT; ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS; ANALYSIS MCDA; RESOURCE-ALLOCATION; MEDICAL DEVICES; ECONOMIC-EVALUATION; RARE DISEASES; PATIENT PREFERENCES; EVIDEM FRAMEWORK; INCOME COUNTRIES;
D O I
10.1007/s10198-019-01052-3
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Background Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) concepts, models and tools have been used increasingly in health technology assessment (HTA), with several studies pointing out practical and theoretical issues related to its use. This study provides a critical review of published studies on MCDA in the context of HTA by assessing their methodological quality and summarising methodological challenges. Methods A systematic review was conducted to identify studies discussing, developing or reviewing the use of MCDA in HTA using aggregation approaches. Studies were classified according to publication time and type, country of study, technology type and study type. The PROACTIVE-S approach was constructed and used to analyse methodological quality. Challenges and limitations reported in eligible studies were collected and summarised; this was followed by a critical discussion on research requirements to address the identified challenges. Results 129 journal articles were eligible for review, 56% of which were published in 2015-2017; 42% focused on pharmaceuticals; 36, 26 and 18% reported model applications, issues regarding MCDA implementation analyses, and proposing frameworks, respectively. Poor compliance with good methodological practice (<25% complying studies) was found regarding behavioural analyses, discussion of model assumptions and uncertainties, modelling of value functions, and dealing with judgment inconsistencies. The five most reported challenges related to evidence and data synthesis; value system differences and participant selection issues; participant difficulties; methodological complexity and resource balance; and criteria and attributes modelling. A critical discussion on ways to address these challenges ensues. Discussion Results highlight the need for advancement in robust methodologies, procedures and tools to improve methodological quality of MCDA in HTA studies. Research pathways include developing new model features, good practice guidelines, technologies to enable participation and behavioural research.
引用
收藏
页码:891 / 918
页数:28
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A comparative assessment of multi-criteria decision analysis for flood susceptibility modelling
    Shahiri Tabarestani, Ehsan
    Afzalimehr, Hossein
    GEOCARTO INTERNATIONAL, 2022, 37 (20) : 5851 - 5874
  • [42] Sustainability assessment of products based on fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis
    Feng, Chunhua
    Mai, Yunfei
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY, 2016, 85 (1-4): : 695 - 710
  • [43] A multi-criteria decision analysis assessment of waste paper management options
    Hanan, Deirdre
    Burnley, Stephen
    Cooke, David
    WASTE MANAGEMENT, 2013, 33 (03) : 566 - 573
  • [44] A Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis based assessment of walling materials in India
    Sabapathy, Ashwin
    Maithel, Sameer
    BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT, 2013, 64 : 107 - 117
  • [45] National Risk Assessment in The Netherlands A Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Approach
    Pruyt, Erik
    Wijnmalen, Diederik
    MULTIPLE CRITERIA DECISION MAKING FOR SUSTAINABLE ENERGY AND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 19TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MULTIPLE CRITERIA DECISION MAKING, 2010, 634 : 133 - 143
  • [46] Aggregation Functions Considering Criteria Interrelationships in Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making: State-of-the-Art
    Sun, Le
    Dong, Hai
    Liu, Alex X.
    IEEE ACCESS, 2018, 6 : 68104 - 68136
  • [47] State-of-the-art review on multi-criteria decision-making in the transport sector
    George Yannis
    Angeliki Kopsacheili
    Anastasios Dragomanovits
    Virginia Petraki
    Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering(English Edition), 2020, 7 (04) : 413 - 431
  • [48] State-of-the-art review on multi-criteria decision-making in the transport sector
    Yannis, George
    Kopsacheili, Angeliki
    Dragomanovits, Anastasios
    Petraki, Virginia
    JOURNAL OF TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING-ENGLISH EDITION, 2020, 7 (04) : 413 - 431
  • [49] Multi-criteria decision analysis for environmental remediation: Benefits, challenges, and recommended practices
    Havranek, Timothy J.
    REMEDIATION-THE JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP COSTS TECHNOLOGIES & TECHNIQUES, 2019, 29 (02): : 93 - 108
  • [50] Priority setting of health interventions: The need for multi-criteria decision analysis
    Baltussen R.
    Niessen L.
    Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 4 (1)