29 research outputs found
Interventions for increasing uptake in screening programmes
Introduction: Opportunities for the early detection of disease are not sufficiently being taken advantage of. Specific interventions could increase the uptake of prevention programmes. A comprehensive analysis of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these interventions with reference to Germany is still needed. Objectives: This report aimed to describe and assess interventions to increase uptake in primary and secondary prevention and to explore the assessment of their cost-effectiveness. Methods: 29 scientific databases were systematically searched in a wide strategy. Additional references were located from bibliographies. All published systematic reviews and primary studies were assessed for inclusion without language restrictions. Teams of two reviewers identified the literature, extracted data and assessed the quality of the publications independently. Results: Four HTA reports and 22 systematic reviews were identified for the medical evaluation covering a variety of interventions. The economic evaluation was based on two HTA-reports, one meta-analysis and 15 studies. The evidence was consistent for the effectiveness of invitations and reminders aimed at users, and for prompts aimed at health care professionals. These interventions were the most commonly analysed. (Financial) Incentives for users and professionals were identified in a small number of studies. Limited evidence was available for cost-effectiveness showing incremental costs for follow-up reminders and invitations by telephone. Evidence for ethical, social and legal aspects pointed to needs in vulnerable populations. Discussion: The material was heterogeneous regarding interventions used, study populations and settings. The majority of references originated from the United States and focused on secondary prevention. Approaching all target groups by invitations and reminders was recommended to increase uptake in prevention programmes in general. Conclusions: Further research should aim to focus on primary prevention. Future research should also focus on specific interventions aiming to include vulnerable target groups and individuals, who have not previously made use of opportunities for prevention
REVEALING AND ACKNOWLEDGING VALUE JUDGMENTS IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT
Background: Although value issues are increasingly addressed in health technology assessment (HTA) reports, HTA is still seen as a scientific endeavor and sometimes contrasted with value judgments, which are considered arbitrary and unscientific. This article aims at illustrating how numerous value judgments are at play in the HTA process, and why it is important to acknowledge and address value judgments. Methods: A panel of experts involved in HTA, including ethicists, scrutinized the HTA process with regard to implicit value judgments. It was analyzed whether these value judgments undermine the accountability of HTA results. The final results were obtained after several rounds of deliberation. Results: Value judgments are identified before the assessment when identifying and selecting health technologies to assess, and as part of assessment. They are at play in the processes of deciding on how to select, frame, present, summarize or synthesize information in systematic reviews. Also, in economic analysis, value judgments are ubiquitous. Addressing the ethical, legal, and social issues of a given health technology involves moral, legal, and social value judgments by definition. So do the appraisal and the decision-making process. Conclusions: HTA by and large is a process of value judgments. However, the preponderance of value judgments does not render HTA biased or flawed. On the contrary they are basic elements of the HTA process. Acknowledging and explicitly addressing value judgments may improve the accountability of HT
Ethical issues in autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in advanced breast cancer: A systematic literature review
BACKGROUND: An effectiveness assessment on ASCT in locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer identified serious ethical issues associated with this intervention. Our objective was to systematically review these aspects by means of a literature analysis. METHODS: We chose the reflexive Socratic approach as the review method using Hofmann's question list, conducted a comprehensive literature search in biomedical, psychological and ethics bibliographic databases and screened the resulting hits in a 2-step selection process. Relevant arguments were assembled from the included articles, and were assessed and assigned to the question list. Hofmann's questions were addressed by synthesizing these arguments. RESULTS: Of the identified 879 documents 102 included arguments related to one or more questions from Hofmann's question list. The most important ethical issues were the implementation of ASCT in clinical practice on the basis of phase-II trials in the 1990s and the publication of falsified data in the first randomized controlled trials (Bezwoda fraud), which caused significant negative effects on recruiting patients for further clinical trials and the doctor-patient relationship. Recent meta-analyses report a marginal effect in prolonging disease-free survival, accompanied by severe harms, including death. ASCT in breast cancer remains a stigmatized technology. Reported health-related-quality-of-life data are often at high risk of bias in favor of the survivors. Furthermore little attention has been paid to those patients who were dying. CONCLUSIONS: The questions were addressed in different degrees of completeness. All arguments were assignable to the questions. The central ethical dimensions of ASCT could be discussed by reviewing the published literature
Informationen zu rechtlichen Aspekten von Gesundheitstechnologien: Methodenvorschlag zur systematischen und nachvollziehbaren Identifizierung
Reporting information retrieval processes: Reply
Many thanks to van der Hoorn and colleagues for their interest in our article and the interesting discussion points. Their comments are very important and deserve to be answered.</jats:p
Reporting and presenting information retrieval processes: the need for optimizing common practice in health technology assessment
Background: Information retrieval (IR) in health technology assessment (HTA) calls for transparency and reproducibility, but common practice in the documentation and presentation of this process is inadequate in fulfilling this demand.Objectives: Our objective is to promote good IR practice by presenting the conceptualization of retrieval and transcription readable to non-information specialists, and reporting of effectively processed search strategies.Methods: We performed a comprehensive database search (04/2010) to synthesize the current state-of-the-art. We then developed graphical and tabular presentation methods and tested their feasibility on existing research questions and defined recommendations.Results: No generally accepted standard of reporting of IR in HTA exists. We, therefore, developed templates for presenting the retrieval conceptualization, database selection, and additional hand-searching as well as for presenting search histories of complex and lengthy search strategies. No single template fits all conceptualizations, but some can be applied to most processes. Database interface providers report queries as entered, not as they are actually processed. In PubMed®, the huge difference between entered and processed query is shown in “Details.” Quality control and evaluation of search strategies using a validated tool such as the PRESS checklist is suboptimal when only entry-query based search histories are applied.Conclusions: Moving toward an internationally accepted IR reporting standard calls for advances in common reporting practices. Comprehensive, process-based reporting and presentation would make IR more understandable to others than information specialists and facilitate quality control.</jats:p
