• 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

国际卫生技术评估实用数据法规与建议。

International Regulations and Recommendations for Utility Data for Health Technology Assessment.

机构信息

School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK.

Takeda Pharmaceuticals International AG, Thurgauerstrasse 130, 8152, Glattpark-Opfikon (Zurich), Switzerland.

出版信息

Pharmacoeconomics. 2017 Dec;35(Suppl 1):11-19. doi: 10.1007/s40273-017-0544-y.

DOI:10.1007/s40273-017-0544-y
PMID:29052162
Abstract

Recommendations and guidelines for the collection, generation, source and usage of utility data for health technology assessment (HTA) vary across different countries, with no international consensus. Many international agencies generate their own guidelines providing details on their preferred methods for HTA submissions, and there is variability in both what they recommend and the clarity and amount of detail provided in their guidelines. This article provides an overview of international regulations and recommendations for utility data in HTA for a selection of key HTA countries: Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain (Catalonia), Sweden and the UK (England/Wales and Scotland). International guidelines are typically clear and detailed for the selection of countries assessed regarding the source description of health states (e.g. generic preference-based measure) and who should provide preference weights for these health states (e.g. general population for own country). Many guidelines specify the use of off-the-shelf generic preference-based measures, and some further specify a measure, such as EQ-5D. However, international guidelines are either unclear or lack detailed guidance regarding the collection (e.g. patients report own health), source (e.g. clinical trial) and usage (e.g. adjusting for comorbidities) of utility values. It is argued that there is a need for transparent and detailed international guidelines on utility data recommendations to provide decision makers with the best possible evidence. Where this is not possible it is recommended that best practice should be used to inform the collection, source and usage of utility values in HTA.

摘要

对于健康技术评估(HTA)实用数据的收集、生成、来源和使用,不同国家的推荐和指南存在差异,尚未达成国际共识。许多国际机构制定了自己的指南,详细说明了他们对 HTA 提交的首选方法,而且他们推荐的方法以及指南的清晰度和详细程度存在差异。本文概述了一些关键 HTA 国家(澳大利亚、加拿大、法国、德国、荷兰、西班牙(加泰罗尼亚)、瑞典和英国(英格兰/威尔士和苏格兰))的 HTA 中实用数据的国际法规和建议。国际指南通常对评估国家的来源描述(例如通用偏好测量)和谁应为这些健康状况提供偏好权重(例如本国的一般人群)的选择明确而详细。许多指南都规定了使用现成的通用偏好测量方法,一些指南还进一步规定了某种措施,例如 EQ-5D。然而,国际指南在实用值的收集(例如患者报告自己的健康状况)、来源(例如临床试验)和使用(例如调整合并症)方面要么不够明确,要么缺乏详细的指导。有人认为,有必要制定透明和详细的国际实用数据推荐指南,为决策者提供尽可能好的证据。在无法做到这一点的情况下,建议采用最佳实践来告知 HTA 中实用值的收集、来源和使用。

相似文献

1
International Regulations and Recommendations for Utility Data for Health Technology Assessment.国际卫生技术评估实用数据法规与建议。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2017 Dec;35(Suppl 1):11-19. doi: 10.1007/s40273-017-0544-y.
2
Which multi-attribute utility instruments are recommended for use in cost-utility analysis? A review of national health technology assessment (HTA) guidelines.哪些多属性效用仪器推荐用于成本效用分析?国家卫生技术评估(HTA)指南的回顾。
Eur J Health Econ. 2020 Nov;21(8):1245-1257. doi: 10.1007/s10198-020-01195-8. Epub 2020 Jun 8.
3
International comparison of comparative effectiveness research in five jurisdictions: insights for the US.五个司法管辖区的比较有效性研究的国际比较:对美国的启示。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(10):813-30. doi: 10.2165/11536150-000000000-00000.
4
Most important barriers and facilitators of HTA usage in decision-making in Europe.欧洲卫生技术评估(HTA)在决策过程中最重要的障碍和促进因素。
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2018 Jun;18(3):297-304. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2018.1421459. Epub 2018 Jan 5.
5
Health technology assessment of medical devices: What is different? An overview of three European projects.医疗设备的卫生技术评估:有何不同?三个欧洲项目概述。
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2015;109(4-5):309-18. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2015.06.011. Epub 2015 Jul 26.
6
Towards Integrated Health Technology Assessment for Improving Decision Making in Selected Countries.迈向综合卫生技术评估以改善部分国家的决策制定
Value Health. 2017 Sep;20(8):1121-1130. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.03.011. Epub 2017 May 12.
7
Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Case Studies: Factors Influencing Divergent HTA Reimbursement Recommendations in Australia, Canada, England, and Scotland.卫生技术评估(HTA)案例研究:影响澳大利亚、加拿大、英格兰和苏格兰卫生技术评估报销建议分歧的因素
Value Health. 2017 Mar;20(3):320-328. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.10.014. Epub 2016 Dec 22.
8
Patient advocate perspectives on involvement in HTA: an international snapshot.患者权益倡导者对参与卫生技术评估的看法:国际概览
Res Involv Engagem. 2017 Jan 10;3:2. doi: 10.1186/s40900-016-0052-9. eCollection 2017.
9
Differences in Health Technology Assessment Recommendations Among European Jurisdictions: The Role of Practice Variations.欧洲司法管辖区之间的卫生技术评估建议差异:实践差异的作用。
Value Health. 2020 Jan;23(1):10-16. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.07.017.
10
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.

引用本文的文献

1
Eliciting and Anchoring Health State Preferences Using Discrete Choice Experiments Among Adults, Adolescents, and Children.通过离散选择实验在成人、青少年和儿童中引出并确定健康状态偏好
Pharmacoeconomics. 2025 Aug 19. doi: 10.1007/s40273-025-01530-y.
2
Depicting patient-reported outcome measures within directed acyclic graphs: practice and implications for causal reasoning.在有向无环图中描述患者报告的结局指标:因果推理的实践与启示
Qual Life Res. 2025 Jun 27. doi: 10.1007/s11136-025-04007-9.
3
Validation of the Cancer-Specific Preference-Based Measure EORTC QLU-C10D against the Generic Instruments EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 in a Prospectively Collected Sample of Patients with Cancer in Austria and France.

本文引用的文献

1
The Use of Health State Utility Values in Decision Models.健康状态效用值在决策模型中的应用。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2017 Dec;35(Suppl 1):77-88. doi: 10.1007/s40273-017-0550-0.
2
Estimating Health State Utility Values for Comorbidities.估算共病的健康状态效用值。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2017 Dec;35(Suppl 1):89-94. doi: 10.1007/s40273-017-0551-z.
3
Measuring Care-Related Quality of Life of Caregivers for Use in Economic Evaluations: CarerQol Tariffs for Australia, Germany, Sweden, UK, and US.用于经济评估的护理人员护理相关生活质量测量:澳大利亚、德国、瑞典、英国和美国的护理者生活质量量表
在奥地利和法国前瞻性收集的癌症患者样本中,基于癌症特异性偏好的测量指标EORTC QLU-C10D相对于通用工具EQ-5D-5L和SF-6Dv2的验证。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2025 Apr 27. doi: 10.1007/s40273-025-01501-3.
4
An international compendium of health state utilities in people with HIV: a systematic review.一份关于艾滋病毒感染者健康状态效用的国际汇编:系统评价。
Qual Life Res. 2025 Apr 17. doi: 10.1007/s11136-025-03966-3.
5
A standard gamble study to determine health state utilities associated with seizures in glioma in the UK.一项在英国开展的标准博弈研究,旨在确定与胶质瘤癫痫发作相关的健康状态效用值。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2025 Mar 11;23(1):22. doi: 10.1186/s12955-025-02348-0.
6
Measuring health-related quality of life: a qualitative study of mental health patients' experiences of impacts of mental health issues.测量与健康相关的生活质量:一项关于心理健康患者对心理健康问题影响体验的定性研究。
Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2025 Dec;20(1):2465209. doi: 10.1080/17482631.2025.2465209. Epub 2025 Feb 20.
7
Safety and effectiveness of an herbal decoction (modified Saengmaeksan) in hypertensive patients: Protocol for a real-world prospective observational study.一种草药煎剂(改良生脉散)在高血压患者中的安全性和有效性:一项真实世界前瞻性观察研究方案
PLoS One. 2025 Jan 17;20(1):e0316276. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0316276. eCollection 2025.
8
Utilities Associated with the Treatment of Growth Hormone Deficiency (GHD): A Time Trade-off (TTO) Study in the UK and Canada.生长激素缺乏症(GHD)治疗相关效用:英国和加拿大的时间权衡(TTO)研究
Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2025 Jan 10;16:9-21. doi: 10.2147/PROM.S479705. eCollection 2025.
9
Good Practices for Health Technology Assessment Guideline Development: A Report of the Health Technology Assessment International, HTAsiaLink, and ISPOR Special Task Force.卫生技术评估指南制定的良好实践:卫生技术评估国际组织、HTAsiaLink及药物经济学与结果研究国际协会特别工作组的报告
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2025 Jan 6;40(1):e74. doi: 10.1017/S0266462324004719.
10
A time trade-off study in the UK, Canada and the US to estimate utilities associated with the treatment of haemophilia.一项在英国、加拿大和美国进行的时间权衡研究,旨在估计与血友病治疗相关的效用。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2024 Nov 13;22(1):97. doi: 10.1186/s12955-024-02311-5.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2017 Apr;35(4):469-478. doi: 10.1007/s40273-016-0477-x.
4
Estimating Health-State Utility for Economic Models in Clinical Studies: An ISPOR Good Research Practices Task Force Report.临床研究中经济模型的健康状态效用评估:一份药物经济学与结果研究协会良好研究实践特别工作组报告
Value Health. 2016 Sep-Oct;19(6):704-719. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.06.001.
5
Recommendations for Conduct, Methodological Practices, and Reporting of Cost-effectiveness Analyses: Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine.《健康与医疗领域成本效益分析的实施、方法学实践和报告推荐:第二版》。
JAMA. 2016 Sep 13;316(10):1093-103. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.12195.
6
From Good to Better: New Dutch Guidelines for Economic Evaluations in Healthcare.从良好到更佳:荷兰医疗保健经济评估新指南
Pharmacoeconomics. 2016 Nov;34(11):1071-1074. doi: 10.1007/s40273-016-0431-y.
7
Swedish experience-based value sets for EQ-5D health states.基于瑞典经验的EQ-5D健康状态价值集。
Qual Life Res. 2014 Mar;23(2):431-42. doi: 10.1007/s11136-013-0496-4. Epub 2013 Aug 22.
8
A discrete choice experiment to obtain a tariff for valuing informal care situations measured with the CarerQol instrument.一项离散选择实验,旨在获得用于评估以照顾者生活质量(CarerQol)工具衡量的非正式照护情况的费用标准。
Med Decis Making. 2014 Jan;34(1):84-96. doi: 10.1177/0272989X13492013. Epub 2013 Jun 14.
9
Estimation of a preference-based carer experience scale.估算基于偏好的照顾者体验量表。
Med Decis Making. 2011 May-Jun;31(3):458-68. doi: 10.1177/0272989X10381280. Epub 2010 Oct 5.