FIFARMA MCDA framework for healthcare decision-making
The FIFARMA MCDA framework helps make healthcare decisions by considering multiple factors—like effectiveness, cost, and innovation—in a clear and fair way. It involves input from different stakeholders to improve transparency and cooperation in decisions about treatments and technologies.
At a glance
Use when
When making complex healthcare decisions requiring stakeholder input, especially in HTA, tendering, or technology appraisal where innovation and non-traditional criteria are important.
Avoid when
When strict quantitative cost-effectiveness analysis is mandated; when stakeholder engagement is not feasible; or when full MCDA resources are unavailable.
Inputs
Multiple criteria including clinical effectiveness, cost, innovation, social impact, and stakeholder values; qualitative and quantitative data sources.
Outputs
Structured evaluation scores or rankings of health technologies or interventions supporting decision-making in HTA or procurement.
How it works
The FIFARMA MCDA framework is a deliberative, partial multiple-criteria decision analysis approach designed to support healthcare decision-making, particularly in HTA and procurement processes. It integrates criteria such as clinical benefit, economic impact, innovation, and social aspects through a structured, transparent process that enables stakeholder participation. The framework was developed based on global and Latin American real-world applications and literature review.
- HTA domains
- Clinical Effectiveness, Costs & Economic Evaluation, Patient and Social Aspects
- Assumptions
- Stakeholder engagement improves legitimacy and acceptance of decisions; multiple criteria beyond cost-effectiveness are relevant; structured deliberation enhances transparency.
- Strengths
- Promotes transparency, inclusivity, and consistency in decision-making; adaptable to different contexts; incorporates innovation and social values; supports early dialogue in HTA and contracting.
- Limitations
- Requires stakeholder alignment and capacity-building; scoring and weighting methods may lack standardization; partial MCDA may omit some criteria; limited validation in diverse health systems.
- Also known as
- FIFARMA MCDA, Deliberative MCDA framework
Questions this answers
- › How can healthcare decisions incorporate both quantitative and qualitative criteria?
- › How can stakeholder values be integrated into HTA processes?
- › What role does innovation play in technology assessment?
- › How can transparency and fairness be improved in procurement and tendering?
- › What structured methods support multi-criteria evaluation in health systems?
- › How can MCDA complement traditional HTA in Latin American contexts?
References & sources
Similar by meaning
Beta record. Based on the original catalogue summary; primary-source enrichment pending.