Patients' Perspectives in HTA: A Route to Robust Evidence and Fair Deliberation
This method explains how to include patients' views in health technology assessment (HTA) by gathering strong evidence about their experiences and involving them throughout the HTA process. It helps ensure that patient voices are heard in a fair and meaningful way when decisions about health technologies are made.
At a glance
Use when
Developing patient-centered HTA; seeking to improve deliberative processes; aiming to include qualitative evidence on patient experiences
Avoid when
When only rapid, narrow clinical or economic assessments are required without patient input
Inputs
Patient experiences, qualitative research data, stakeholder input, HTA scoping documents
Outputs
Integrated patient perspectives in HTA reports, recommendations for patient involvement, frameworks for fair deliberation
How it works
The method proposes two complementary approaches to strengthen HTA: (i) generating robust evidence on patients' perspectives through high-quality social science research, such as meta-synthesis or primary qualitative studies, and (ii) enabling effective patient engagement across all HTA stages—from scoping to dissemination. It emphasizes transparent, two-way communication and integration of patient input into decision-making to support fair deliberation.
- HTA domains
- Clinical Effectiveness, Organisational aspects, Patient and Social Aspects
- Assumptions
- Patients' perspectives are valuable and can be systematically studied; patient involvement improves legitimacy and quality of HTA; qualitative research can produce robust evidence when rigorously conducted
- Strengths
- Enhances legitimacy and inclusiveness of HTA; supports transparent and fair decision-making; leverages rigorous qualitative methods to avoid tokenism
- Limitations
- Requires expertise in qualitative research; may be resource-intensive; challenges in scaling patient engagement across all HTA stages
- Also known as
- Patient perspectives in HTA, Fair deliberation method for patient involvement, Robust patient evidence method
Questions this answers
- › How can patients' views be systematically included in HTA?
- › What methods generate reliable evidence on patient perspectives?
- › How can patient engagement improve the fairness of HTA processes?
- › At which stages of HTA should patients be involved?
- › How can patient input be integrated transparently into decision-making?
- › What distinguishes anecdotal input from robust patient evidence in HTA?
References & sources
Similar by meaning
Beta record. Generated from the primary source via AI extraction and independent audit, pending final human review.