Report and quality analysis of health technology assessment_Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Authors：

YAN Yilong ^1,2,3 , WANG Yongsheng ^1,2,3 , LI Ying ^1,2 , ZHANG Hairong ^1,2 , CAI Zhisheng ¹ , SONG Guihang ⁴ , YANG Kehu ^1,2 ,  LI Xiuxia ^1,2,3 ,  DING Guowu ^1,3

1. Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center/Health Technology Assessment Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China;
2. Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China;
3. School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China;
4. Gansu Healthcare Security Administration, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China;

Corresponding author：

LI Xiuxia, Email: lixiuxia@lzu.edu.cn; DING Guowu, Email: dinggwlzu@163.com

Keywords：

Health technology; Health technology assessment; Status survey; Reporting quality; Bibliometric analysis

DOI：

10.7507/1672-2531.202210193

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Objective To investigate the health technology assessment reports, analyze publication characteristics and report quality, and explore hot topics in health technology assessment. Methods Web of Science and CNKI databases were searched to collect complete health technology assessment reports from inception to January 2023. SPSS 26.0 software was used to analyze the publication journals, countries, number of authors, assessment types and assessment contents of the assessment reports. The report quality was assessed based on International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) report criteria (2007 edition). VOSviewer 1.6.11 was used to analyze keywords clustering. Results A total of 216 papers were included, with 158 published by Chinese authors, and a rapid growth trend in the number of reports over past four years. The rate of reports on health technology social adaptability assessment was only 17.13%. Among the Chinese reports, 25 were general health technology assessments, 35 were rapid assessments, and 3 were mini assessments. Among the English reports, 4 were rapid assessments, and 54 were regular healthcare technology assessments. For the 14 items in the INAHTA reporting criteria, the reporting rates were high for the brief summary (98.61%), problem description (94.91%), and results discussion entries (97.69%). However, the reporting rates were low for criteria such as personnel responsibilities, conflict of interest statements, and peer review statements, at 31.94%, 19.44%, and 3.24% respectively. English literature generally exhibited higher report quality. Conclusion In recent years, the volume of health technology assessment reports in China has been increasing, with developments in assessment types and application fields. However, there are also problems with standardization of reporting.

Citation： YAN Yilong, WANG Yongsheng, LI Ying, ZHANG Hairong, CAI Zhisheng, SONG Guihang, YANG Kehu, LI Xiuxia, DING Guowu. Report and quality analysis of health technology assessment. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2023, 23(8): 945-950. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.202210193 Copy

1.	王海银, 何达, 王贤吉, 等. 国内外卫生技术评估应用进展及建议. 中国卫生政策研究, 2014, 7(8): 19-23.
2.	Chalkidou K, Marten R, Cutler D, et al. Health technology assessment in universal health coverage. Lancet, 2013, 382(9910): e48-e49.
3.	李静. 卫生技术评估的基本方法. 中国循证医学杂志, 2003, 3(4): 315-320.
4.	陈英耀, 刘文彬, 唐檬, 等. 我国卫生技术评估与决策转化研究概述. 中国卫生政策研究, 2013, 6(7): 1-6.
5.	Bridges JF, Jones C. Patient-based health technology assessment: a vision of the future. Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 2007, Winter,23(1): 30-35.
6.	O'Rourke B, Oortwijn W, Schuller T, et al. The new definition of health technology assessment: a milestone in international collaboration. Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 2020, 36(3): 187-190.
7.	赵琨, 隋宾艳, 郭武栋, 等. 卫生技术评估的国际经验及启示. 中国卫生经济, 2012, 31(2): 87-89.
8.	Oortwijn W. The role of health technology assessment in selected middle-income countries/regions. Bejing: CNHDRC, 2011.
9.	倪春霞. 我国卫生技术评估发展研究. 武汉: 武汉大学, 2017.
10.	隋宾艳, 齐雪然. 英国NICE卫生技术评估研究决策转化机制及对我国的启示. 中国卫生政策研究, 2015, (7): 74-78.
11.	茅艺伟, 陈英耀, 唐檬, 等. 我国卫生技术评估决策转化现状及影响因素的定性研究. 中国卫生质量管理, 2015, 22(2): 91-94.
12.	INAHTA. A checklist for health technology assessment reports. 2007.
13.	Henshall C. Role and uses of HTA in health systems. Beijing: CNHDRC, 2011.
14.	嵇承栋, 朱琳懿, 万悦竹, 等. 国际卫生技术评估机构协作网卫生技术评估报告清单解读. 中国循证医学杂志, 2016, 16(3): 369-372.
15.	辛子艺, 刘婷, 陈少贤. 广东省基层适宜卫生技术使用现状及筛选评价探讨. 中国初级卫生保健, 2014, 28(2): 10-13.
16.	欧盟AdHopHTA项目组. 医院卫生技术评估: 手册与工具包. 上海: 上海交通大学出版社, 2017.
17.	NICE. Technology appraisal recommendation summary. 2011.
18.	Moberg J, Oxman AD, Rosenbaum S, et al. The GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) framework for health system and public health decisions. Health Res Policy Syst, 2018, 16(1): 45.
19.	Schünemann HJ, Reinap M, Piggott T, et al. The ecosystem of health decision making: from fragmentation to synergy. Lancet Public Health, 2022, 7(4): e378-e390.
20.	Ritrovato M, Faggiano FC, Tedesco G, et al. Decision-oriented health technology assessment: one step forward in supporting the decision-making process in hospitals. Value Health, 2015, 18(4): 505-511.

1. 王海银, 何达, 王贤吉, 等. 国内外卫生技术评估应用进展及建议. 中国卫生政策研究, 2014, 7(8): 19-23.
2. Chalkidou K, Marten R, Cutler D, et al. Health technology assessment in universal health coverage. Lancet, 2013, 382(9910): e48-e49.
3. 李静. 卫生技术评估的基本方法. 中国循证医学杂志, 2003, 3(4): 315-320.
4. 陈英耀, 刘文彬, 唐檬, 等. 我国卫生技术评估与决策转化研究概述. 中国卫生政策研究, 2013, 6(7): 1-6.
5. Bridges JF, Jones C. Patient-based health technology assessment: a vision of the future. Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 2007, Winter,23(1): 30-35.
6. O'Rourke B, Oortwijn W, Schuller T, et al. The new definition of health technology assessment: a milestone in international collaboration. Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 2020, 36(3): 187-190.
7. 赵琨, 隋宾艳, 郭武栋, 等. 卫生技术评估的国际经验及启示. 中国卫生经济, 2012, 31(2): 87-89.
8. Oortwijn W. The role of health technology assessment in selected middle-income countries/regions. Bejing: CNHDRC, 2011.
9. 倪春霞. 我国卫生技术评估发展研究. 武汉: 武汉大学, 2017.
10. 隋宾艳, 齐雪然. 英国NICE卫生技术评估研究决策转化机制及对我国的启示. 中国卫生政策研究, 2015, (7): 74-78.
11. 茅艺伟, 陈英耀, 唐檬, 等. 我国卫生技术评估决策转化现状及影响因素的定性研究. 中国卫生质量管理, 2015, 22(2): 91-94.
12. INAHTA. A checklist for health technology assessment reports. 2007.
13. Henshall C. Role and uses of HTA in health systems. Beijing: CNHDRC, 2011.
14. 嵇承栋, 朱琳懿, 万悦竹, 等. 国际卫生技术评估机构协作网卫生技术评估报告清单解读. 中国循证医学杂志, 2016, 16(3): 369-372.
15. 辛子艺, 刘婷, 陈少贤. 广东省基层适宜卫生技术使用现状及筛选评价探讨. 中国初级卫生保健, 2014, 28(2): 10-13.
16. 欧盟AdHopHTA项目组. 医院卫生技术评估: 手册与工具包. 上海: 上海交通大学出版社, 2017.
17. NICE. Technology appraisal recommendation summary. 2011.
18. Moberg J, Oxman AD, Rosenbaum S, et al. The GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) framework for health system and public health decisions. Health Res Policy Syst, 2018, 16(1): 45.
19. Schünemann HJ, Reinap M, Piggott T, et al. The ecosystem of health decision making: from fragmentation to synergy. Lancet Public Health, 2022, 7(4): e378-e390.
20. Ritrovato M, Faggiano FC, Tedesco G, et al. Decision-oriented health technology assessment: one step forward in supporting the decision-making process in hospitals. Value Health, 2015, 18(4): 505-511.

Previous Article
Acupuncture and moxibustion for Parkinson’s disease: an overview of systematic reviews
Next Article
The construction of terminology standard for hospital quality and safety

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Report and quality analysis of health technology assessment

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content