Oortwijn Wija, van der Wilt Gert Jan
ECORYS Netherlands BV.
Radboud University Medical
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2016 Jan;32(1-2):1-2. doi: 10.1017/S0266462316000143. Epub 2016 Apr 11.
The Special Interest Group on Ethics and HTA (health technology assessment) has invited two renowned philosophers, Norman Daniels from Harvard University and Henry Richardson from Georgetown University to reflect on the role of HTA in healthcare policy making. Both acknowledge its importance, but at the same time warn against a too mechanistic deployment of HTA. In their view, the relevance of HTA to healthcare policy making would considerably be enhanced if it were subsumed within a broader deliberative framework. Why should this be so? What is there to deliberate on, who should do the deliberating, where and when, and how does this relate to the more technical elements of HTA such as evidence synthesis and economic modeling?
伦理与卫生技术评估特别兴趣小组邀请了两位著名哲学家，哈佛大学的诺曼·丹尼尔斯和乔治敦大学的亨利·理查森，来思考卫生技术评估在医疗保健政策制定中的作用。两人都承认其重要性，但同时也警告不要过于机械地应用卫生技术评估。在他们看来，如果将卫生技术评估纳入更广泛的审议框架，它与医疗保健政策制定的相关性将大大增强。为什么会这样呢？需要审议什么、谁来进行审议、在何时何地进行审议，以及这与卫生技术评估的更技术化要素（如证据综合和经济建模）有何关系？
