• 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

决策框架和考虑因素,用于为医疗保健干预措施的覆盖范围决策提供信息:批判性综合解释。

Decision-making frameworks and considerations for informing coverage decisions for healthcare interventions: a critical interpretive synthesis.

机构信息

Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4L6, Canada.

Department of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, 21 Arch St., Kingston, Ontario, K7L 3N6, Canada.

出版信息

J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 Feb;94:143-150. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.09.023. Epub 2017 Oct 6.

DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.09.023
PMID:28988959
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To guide decision-making about whether or not to pay for a new healthcare intervention, a number of existing frameworks systematically weigh scientific evidence, cost, and social and ethical values. Each framework has strengths and limitations. This study aims to review and summarize available frameworks and generate an integrated framework, if and where applicable, highlighting particular issues faced with expensive but effective and desirable healthcare interventions.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We conducted a critical interpretive synthesis to inform decision-making about healthcare interventions. We updated prior systematic reviews on decision-making frameworks through 2015. Purposive sampling identified relevant constructs and considerations to facilitate decision-making.

RESULTS

Of 2,980 references, we purposively sampled 19 frameworks. The new framework, which built on the GRADE Evidence to Decision framework, included burden of disease, benefits and harms, values and preferences, resource use, equity, acceptability, and feasibility. Modifications to the Evidence to Decision framework included adding limitations of alternative technologies considerations in use (expanding benefits and harms) and broadening acceptability and feasibility constructs to include political and health system factors. No modifications appeared necessary to address the situation of effective but expensive and desirable interventions.

CONCLUSION

Guideline developers, health technology assessment producers, and decision-makers can use our integrated framework to inform decision-making about healthcare interventions.

摘要

目的

为了指导是否为新的医疗保健干预措施付费的决策,现有的一些框架系统地权衡科学证据、成本以及社会和伦理价值。每个框架都有其优势和局限性。本研究旨在回顾和总结现有的框架,并在适用的情况下生成一个综合框架,突出考虑昂贵但有效和理想的医疗保健干预措施所面临的特殊问题。

研究设计和设置

我们进行了批判性解释性综合,为医疗保健干预措施的决策提供信息。我们通过 2015 年更新了关于决策框架的先前系统评价。有针对性的抽样确定了相关的构建和考虑因素,以促进决策。

结果

在 2980 篇参考文献中,我们有针对性地抽取了 19 个框架。新框架建立在 GRADE 证据到决策框架的基础上,包括疾病负担、收益和危害、价值观和偏好、资源利用、公平性、可接受性和可行性。对证据到决策框架的修改包括在使用中增加替代技术考虑因素的局限性(扩大收益和危害),以及扩大可接受性和可行性结构,以纳入政治和卫生系统因素。似乎没有必要对有效但昂贵且理想的干预措施的情况进行修改。

结论

指南制定者、卫生技术评估制作者和决策者可以使用我们的综合框架为医疗保健干预措施的决策提供信息。

相似文献

1
Decision-making frameworks and considerations for informing coverage decisions for healthcare interventions: a critical interpretive synthesis.决策框架和考虑因素,用于为医疗保健干预措施的覆盖范围决策提供信息:批判性综合解释。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 Feb;94:143-150. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.09.023. Epub 2017 Oct 6.
2
The GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) framework for health system and public health decisions.卫生系统和公共卫生决策中的 GRADE 证据决策(EtD)框架。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2018 May 29;16(1):45. doi: 10.1186/s12961-018-0320-2.
3
Risk management frameworks for human health and environmental risks.人类健康与环境风险的风险管理框架。
J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2003 Nov-Dec;6(6):569-720. doi: 10.1080/10937400390208608.
4
Evidence-to-decision frameworks: a review and analysis to inform decision-making for environmental health interventions.证据决策框架:为环境健康干预措施的决策提供信息的综述与分析。
Environ Health. 2021 Dec 8;20(1):124. doi: 10.1186/s12940-021-00794-z.
5
Stakeholders apply the GRADE evidence-to-decision framework to facilitate coverage decisions.利益相关者应用GRADE证据到决策框架来促进医保覆盖决策。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Jun;86:129-139. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.02.019. Epub 2017 Apr 1.
6
The greatest happiness of the greatest number? Policy actors' perspectives on the limits of economic evaluation as a tool for informing health care coverage decisions in Thailand.最大多数人的最大幸福?政策制定者对经济评估作为泰国医疗覆盖范围决策工具局限性的看法。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2008 Sep 26;8:197. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-8-197.
7
Conceptual frameworks and key dimensions to support coverage decisions for vaccines.支持疫苗覆盖决策的概念框架和关键维度
Vaccine. 2015 Feb 25;33(9):1206-17. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.12.020. Epub 2014 Dec 19.
8
Development of the WHO-INTEGRATE evidence-to-decision framework: an overview of systematic reviews of decision criteria for health decision-making.世界卫生组织综合证据到决策框架的制定:健康决策制定决策标准系统评价概述
Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2020 Feb 11;18:8. doi: 10.1186/s12962-020-0203-6. eCollection 2020.
9
[GRADE: Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks - a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 2: Clinical guidelines].[分级:证据到决策(EtD)框架——一种做出明智医疗选择的系统且透明的方法。2:临床指南]
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2019 Mar;140:63-73. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2019.02.006. Epub 2019 Mar 8.
10
Review of Recent US Value Frameworks-A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [6].近期美国价值框架综述——一种卫生经济学方法:一份药物经济学与结果研究协会(ISPOR)特别工作组报告[6]
Value Health. 2018 Feb;21(2):155-160. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.12.011.

引用本文的文献

1
Users' experience of frameworks to support evidence-informed decision-making in public health: a scoping review.用户对支持公共卫生循证决策的框架的体验:一项范围综述
Euro Surveill. 2025 May;30(19). doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2025.30.19.2400184.
2
Frameworks to support evidence-informed decision-making in public health and infectious disease prevention and control: a scoping review.支持公共卫生及传染病预防与控制中循证决策的框架:一项范围综述
Euro Surveill. 2025 May;30(19). doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2025.30.19.2400185.
3
GRADE guidance 40: The GRADE evidence-to-decision framework for environmental and occupational health.
GRADE指南40:环境与职业健康的GRADE证据到决策框架
Environ Int. 2025 Mar;197:109314. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2025.109314. Epub 2025 Feb 1.
4
Development of a framework to structure decision-making in environmental and occupational health: A systematic review and Delphi study.构建环境与职业健康决策框架的研究:一项系统综述与德尔菲研究
Environ Int. 2025 Jan;195:109209. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2024.109209. Epub 2024 Dec 20.
5
Considering planetary health in health guidelines and health technology assessments: a scoping review protocol.考虑在健康指南和卫生技术评估中纳入行星健康:范围综述方案。
Syst Rev. 2024 Jun 22;13(1):163. doi: 10.1186/s13643-024-02577-2.
6
Institutional Priority-Setting for Novel Drugs and Therapeutics: A Qualitative Systematic Review.新型药物和疗法的机构优先排序:定性系统评价。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2024;13:7494. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2024.7494. Epub 2024 Feb 10.
7
Components of Outpatient Child and Youth Concurrent Disorders Programs: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis: Composantes des programmes de troubles concomitants des enfants et des jeunes ambulatoires : une synthèse interprétative critique.门诊儿童和青少年共病项目的组成部分:批判性解释性综合——门诊儿童和青少年共病项目的组成部分:批判性解释性综合。
Can J Psychiatry. 2024 Jun;69(6):381-394. doi: 10.1177/07067437231212037. Epub 2023 Nov 9.
8
Evidence-to-decision frameworks: a review and analysis to inform decision-making for environmental health interventions.证据决策框架:为环境健康干预措施的决策提供信息的综述与分析。
Environ Health. 2021 Dec 8;20(1):124. doi: 10.1186/s12940-021-00794-z.
9
More than cost-effectiveness? Applying a second-stage filter to improve policy decision making.超越成本效益?应用二阶筛选器改善政策决策。
Health Expect. 2021 Aug;24(4):1413-1423. doi: 10.1111/hex.13277. Epub 2021 Jun 1.
10
Which Criteria are Considered and How are They Evaluated in Health Technology Assessments? A Review of Methodological Guidelines Used in Western and Asian Countries.在健康技术评估中考虑了哪些标准,以及如何对其进行评估?对西方国家和亚洲国家使用的方法学指南的综述。
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2021 May;19(3):281-304. doi: 10.1007/s40258-020-00634-0. Epub 2021 Jan 11.