• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Towards a more transparent HTA process in Poland: new Polish HTA methodological guidelines.迈向波兰更透明的卫生技术评估流程:波兰卫生技术评估新方法指南
J Mark Access Health Policy. 2017 Jul 26;5(1):1355202. doi: 10.1080/20016689.2017.1355202. eCollection 2017.
2
Health technology assessment in Poland and Scotland: comparison of process and decisions.波兰和苏格兰的卫生技术评估:过程和决策的比较。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012 Jan;28(1):70-6. doi: 10.1017/S0266462311000699.
3
AOTMiT reimbursement recommendations compared to other HTA agencies.AOTMiT 的报销建议与其他 HTA 机构的比较。
Eur J Health Econ. 2024 Nov;25(8):1291-1310. doi: 10.1007/s10198-023-01655-x. Epub 2024 Jan 23.
4
Transparency in practice: Evidence from 'verification analyses' issued by the Polish Agency for Health Technology Assessment in 2012-2015.透明度实践:来自波兰卫生技术评估机构在 2012-2015 年发布的“验证分析”的证据。
Health Econ Policy Law. 2019 Apr;14(2):182-204. doi: 10.1017/S1744133117000342. Epub 2018 Jan 8.
5
A DECADE OF HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN POLAND.波兰的十年卫生技术评估。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2017 Jan;33(3):350-357. doi: 10.1017/S0266462317000563. Epub 2017 Jul 19.
6
Time from approval to reimbursement recommendations in healthcare systems with centralized HTA processes. Focus on the Polish HTA agency.在具有集中式卫生技术评估流程的医疗保健系统中,从批准到报销建议的时间。以波兰卫生技术评估机构为重点。
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2025 Feb;25(2):265-273. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2024.2416240. Epub 2024 Oct 21.
7
From idealistic rookies to a regional leader: the history of health technology assessment in Poland.从理想主义的新手到地区领导者:波兰卫生技术评估的历史
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009 Jul;25 Suppl 1:156-62. doi: 10.1017/S0266462309090588. Epub 2009 Jun 16.
8
Surrogate Endpoints in Health Technology Assessment: An International Review of Methodological Guidelines.卫生技术评估中的替代终点:方法学指南的国际综述。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2020 Oct;38(10):1055-1070. doi: 10.1007/s40273-020-00935-1.
9
Relating Health Technology Assessment recommendations and reimbursement decisions in Poland in years 2012-2014, a retrospective analysis.2012 - 2014年波兰卫生技术评估建议与报销决策的相关性:一项回顾性分析
Health Policy. 2016 Nov;120(11):1240-1248. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2016.09.021. Epub 2016 Oct 11.
10
[Quality of health care, accreditation, and health technology assessment in Croatia: role of agency for quality and accreditation in health].克罗地亚的医疗保健质量、认证与卫生技术评估:卫生质量与认证机构的作用
Acta Med Croatica. 2010 Dec;64(5):425-34.

引用本文的文献

1
Possibilities of Implementing Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment (HB-HTA) at the Level of Voivodeship Offices in Poland.在波兰的省一级实施基于医院的卫生技术评估(HB-HTA)的可能性。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Sep 7;19(18):11235. doi: 10.3390/ijerph191811235.

本文引用的文献

1
Relating Health Technology Assessment recommendations and reimbursement decisions in Poland in years 2012-2014, a retrospective analysis.2012 - 2014年波兰卫生技术评估建议与报销决策的相关性:一项回顾性分析
Health Policy. 2016 Nov;120(11):1240-1248. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2016.09.021. Epub 2016 Oct 11.
2
Health technology assessment in Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria.波兰、捷克共和国、匈牙利、罗马尼亚和保加利亚的卫生技术评估。
Eur J Health Econ. 2014 May;15 Suppl 1:S13-25. doi: 10.1007/s10198-014-0590-8. Epub 2014 May 16.
3
Methods of international health technology assessment agencies for economic evaluations--a comparative analysis.国际卫生技术评估机构经济评价方法——比较分析。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Sep 30;13:371. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-371.
4
Health technology assessment in Poland and Scotland: comparison of process and decisions.波兰和苏格兰的卫生技术评估:过程和决策的比较。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012 Jan;28(1):70-6. doi: 10.1017/S0266462311000699.
5
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.系统评价与Meta分析的首选报告项目:PRISMA声明。
Ann Intern Med. 2009 Aug 18;151(4):264-9, W64. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135. Epub 2009 Jul 20.
6
From idealistic rookies to a regional leader: the history of health technology assessment in Poland.从理想主义的新手到地区领导者:波兰卫生技术评估的历史
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009 Jul;25 Suppl 1:156-62. doi: 10.1017/S0266462309090588. Epub 2009 Jun 16.
7
AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews.AMSTAR是一种用于评估系统评价方法学质量的可靠且有效的测量工具。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Oct;62(10):1013-20. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.009. Epub 2009 Feb 20.
8
Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses.提高随机对照试验的Meta分析报告质量:QUOROM声明。Meta分析报告的质量。
Lancet. 1999 Nov 27;354(9193):1896-900. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(99)04149-5.
9
Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?评估随机临床试验报告的质量:设盲是否必要?
Control Clin Trials. 1996 Feb;17(1):1-12. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4.
10
Methodologic guidelines for systematic reviews of randomized control trials in health care from the Potsdam Consultation on Meta-Analysis.来自波茨坦荟萃分析咨询会的医疗保健领域随机对照试验系统评价方法学指南。
J Clin Epidemiol. 1995 Jan;48(1):167-71. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(94)00172-m.

迈向波兰更透明的卫生技术评估流程:波兰卫生技术评估新方法指南

Towards a more transparent HTA process in Poland: new Polish HTA methodological guidelines.

作者信息

Lach Krzysztof, Dziwisz Michal, Rémuzat Cécile, Toumi Mondher

机构信息

Department of Pricing & Reimbursement and Market Access, Creativ-Ceutical, Cracow, Poland.

Department of Pricing & Reimbursement and Market Access, Creativ-Ceutical, Paris, France.

出版信息

J Mark Access Health Policy. 2017 Jul 26;5(1):1355202. doi: 10.1080/20016689.2017.1355202. eCollection 2017.

DOI:10.1080/20016689.2017.1355202
PMID:28804603
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5533121/
Abstract

: Health technology assessment (HTA) in Poland supports reimbursement decisions via the Polish HTA Agency (AOTMiT), whose guidelines were updated in 2016. : We identified key changes introduced by the update and, before guideline publication, analysed discrepancies between AOTMiT assessments and the submitting marketing authorisation holders (MAHs) to elucidate the context of the update. We compared the clarity and detail of the new guidelines versus those of the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). : The update specified more precise requirements for items such as indirect comparison or input data for economic modelling. Agency-MAH discrepancies relating to the subjects of the HTA update were found in 14.6% of published documents. The new Polish HTA guidelines were as clear and detailed as NICE's on topics such as assessing quality of evidence and economic modelling, but were less informative when describing (for example) pairwise meta-analysis. : The Polish HTA guidelines update demonstrates lessons learned from internal and external experiences. The new guidelines adhere more closely to UK HTA standards, being clearer and more informative. While the update is expected to reduce Agency-MAH discrepancies, there remain areas for development, such as providing templates to aid HTA submissions.

摘要

波兰的卫生技术评估(HTA)通过波兰卫生技术评估机构(AOTMiT)支持报销决策,该机构的指南于2016年进行了更新。我们确定了更新引入的关键变化,并在指南发布前,分析了AOTMiT评估与提交的药品上市许可持有人(MAHs)之间的差异,以阐明更新的背景。我们比较了新指南与英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)指南的清晰度和详细程度。更新对间接比较或经济建模的输入数据等项目规定了更精确的要求。在14.6%的已发布文件中发现了与HTA更新主题相关的机构 - 药品上市许可持有人差异。波兰新的HTA指南在评估证据质量和经济建模等主题上与NICE的指南一样清晰和详细,但在描述(例如)成对荟萃分析时信息较少。波兰HTA指南更新展示了从内部和外部经验中学到的教训。新指南更紧密地遵循英国HTA标准,更清晰且信息更丰富。虽然预计更新将减少机构 - 药品上市许可持有人之间的差异,但仍有发展空间,例如提供有助于HTA提交的模板。