Baghbanian Abdolvahab, Merlin Tracy, Carter Drew, Wang Shuhong
Adelaide Health Technology Assessment (AHTA), School of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
Adelaide Health Technology Assessment (AHTA), School of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
BMJ Open. 2020 Nov 30;10(11):e039263. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039263.
In healthcare policy and economic literature, research on the health technology assessment (HTA) of complex interventions (CIs) is becoming increasingly important. In many developed countries, HTA guides decision-making to help achieve greater value for money when funding health care. However, research has yet to identify the forms of evidence and evaluation criteria that should be used in the HTA of CIs. Previous research has established that the HTA of CIs requires multiple factors to be evaluated but there is no agreement on which factors ought always to be considered. There is equally little agreement on which forms of evidence ought to be collected or synthesised and how. We plan to perform a systematic scoping review in order to identify the range of evaluation criteria and types of evidence currently used in the HTA of CIs.
This protocol was developed to guide the methodological framework for the conduct of a scoping review on health technology assessment (HTA) of complex interventions (CIs), using the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and the six-stage framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley, in addition to more recent innovations in scoping review methodology. A grey literature search will supplement the primary searches of seven electronic databases for studies available in English between January 2000 and August 2020. Two reviewers will independently screen all search results for inclusion and data will be extracted using a customised data extraction or charting form. Any dispute will be resolved by consensus or through arbitration by a third author. The mnemonic Population, Concept and Context will be adopted to establish criteria for selecting relevant literature, and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: Extension for Scoping Review will be used for reporting the results. Several explanatory-descriptive methods will be used for analysing the extracted data including frequency and trend analyses as well as reflexive thematic coding and analysis.Mapping evidence on the HTA of CIs will allow us to gain a better understanding of both established and emerging practices, including the information types, requirements, values and parameters that are incorporated in the HTA of CIs. We also expect the findings of the scoping review to help identify research gaps that will guide future studies. As healthcare becomes more complex in its delivery, it is timely to determine how these complex interventions should be assessed so that policy decisions can be made about whether implementation and public funding is warranted.
This scoping review will involve secondary analysis of already collected data, and thus, does not require ethics approval. The research findings will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals for publication and will also be disseminated at conferences and seminars.
在医疗政策和经济文献中,关于复杂干预措施(CI)的卫生技术评估(HTA)的研究变得越来越重要。在许多发达国家,HTA指导决策,以帮助在医疗保健资金投入时实现更高的性价比。然而,研究尚未确定在CI的HTA中应使用的证据形式和评估标准。先前的研究已经确定,CI的HTA需要评估多个因素,但对于哪些因素应始终予以考虑尚无共识。对于应收集或综合哪些形式的证据以及如何收集或综合,也同样缺乏共识。我们计划进行一项系统的范围综述,以确定目前在CI的HTA中使用的评估标准范围和证据类型。
本方案旨在指导对复杂干预措施(CI)的卫生技术评估(HTA)进行范围综述的方法框架,采用乔安娜·布里格斯研究所的指南以及阿克西和奥马利提出的六阶段框架,此外还采用了范围综述方法的最新创新。灰色文献搜索将补充对七个电子数据库的初步搜索,以查找2000年1月至2020年8月期间可用的英文研究。两名评审员将独立筛选所有搜索结果以确定是否纳入,数据将使用定制的数据提取或图表形式进行提取。任何争议将通过协商一致解决,或由第三位作者进行仲裁。将采用“人群、概念和背景”助记符来确定选择相关文献的标准,并将使用系统评价和元分析的首选报告项目:范围综述扩展版来报告结果。将使用几种解释性描述性方法来分析提取的数据,包括频率和趋势分析以及反思性主题编码和分析。绘制CI的HTA证据图将使我们能够更好地了解既定和新兴的实践,包括CI的HTA中纳入的信息类型、要求、价值观和参数。我们还期望范围综述的结果有助于确定研究空白,从而指导未来的研究。随着医疗保健服务变得更加复杂,及时确定应如何评估这些复杂干预措施,以便就是否有必要实施和提供公共资金做出政策决策。
本范围综述将涉及对已收集数据的二次分析,因此无需伦理批准。研究结果将提交给同行评审期刊发表,并将在会议和研讨会上传播。