FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2168919294> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2168919294 endingPage "S44" @default.
• W2168919294 startingPage "S39" @default.
• W2168919294 abstract "Health technology assessment (HTA) is a form of policy research that examines shortand long-term consequences of the application of a health-care technology. Properties assessed include evidence of safety, efficacy, patient-reported outcomes, real-world effectiveness, cost, and cost-effectiveness as well as social, legal, ethical, and political impacts [1]. At least five distinct activities define a formal health technology assessment process: 1) horizon scanning; 2) topic determination and queuing; 3) collection and assessment of evidence; 4) appraisal; and 5) funding and policy implementation. Horizon scanning involves the early examination and active monitoring of emerging technology to determine, in part, potential evidence requirements, and budgetary implications. Topic determination and queuing activities focus on setting priorities and sequencing of emerging and previously considered technologies for assessment or reassessment. The assessment function entails the process of collecting, evaluating, and systematically reviewing all available evidence for the technology under consideration. Appraisal is the decision-making function and is often distinguished by an external body (e.g., a pharmacy and therapeutics committee in the United States) that considers and weighs the summarized evidence in order to render a recommendation to the payer. Funding and policy implementation are the final steps in the HTA process. The explicit objective of organizations that operate formal HTA programs is to carefully consider a full range of clinical and economic evidence in order to render decisions as to the acceptance, modification, or rejection of technologies on a rational basis [2]. The UK National Health Service National Coordinating Center for HTA suggests that HTA programs directly consider the following attributes of health technology as they undertake their mission: When compared with existing alternatives, does the technology work, in whom does the technology work, and what is the cost impact? [3]. The funding for and use of health technology assessment programs in the United States has a long and storied history, is fragmented and uncoordinated, and includes both public and private sector initiatives. Some readers will be surprised to learn that a number of US HTA programs predate the development of well-known international efforts in Australia (Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee), Canada (Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health), Sweden (Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care) and the United Kingdom (National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence [NICE]). Regrettably, a number of these early US initiatives have been discontinued or have been substantially altered in large part because of political, financial and commercial pressures. In this article, we consider the changing landscape for systematic health technology assessment in the United States and what it means for health-care payers. In Section I, we start with a description of the many public and private agencies supplying and using health technology assessment reports to make coverage and reimbursement decisions. In Section II, against a backdrop of escalating costs and few restrictions on the pricing and use of health-care technology, we discuss the factors that are shaping and challenging private and public sector HTA programs. Finally, in Section III, we offer commentary on the potential role that a more formal approach to HTA can play in health care in the United States." @default.
• W2168919294 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2168919294 creator A5004754031 @default.
• W2168919294 creator A5025789949 @default.
• W2168919294 creator A5032325756 @default.
• W2168919294 creator A5046985026 @default.
• W2168919294 date "2009-06-01" @default.
• W2168919294 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
• W2168919294 title "Health Technology Assessment in Health-Care Decisions in the United States" @default.
• W2168919294 cites W1969566643 @default.
• W2168919294 cites W1970606422 @default.
• W2168919294 cites W1983688366 @default.
• W2168919294 cites W1988434973 @default.
• W2168919294 cites W2011525958 @default.
• W2168919294 cites W2027709143 @default.
• W2168919294 cites W2058119311 @default.
• W2168919294 cites W2106952837 @default.
• W2168919294 cites W2114150704 @default.
• W2168919294 cites W2118449295 @default.
• W2168919294 cites W2187080369 @default.
• W2168919294 cites W2262950084 @default.
• W2168919294 cites W2001146580 @default.
• W2168919294 doi "https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00557.x" @default.
• W2168919294 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19523183" @default.
• W2168919294 hasPublicationYear "2009" @default.
• W2168919294 type Work @default.
• W2168919294 sameAs 2168919294 @default.
• W2168919294 citedByCount "76" @default.
• W2168919294 countsByYear W21689192942012 @default.
• W2168919294 countsByYear W21689192942013 @default.
• W2168919294 countsByYear W21689192942014 @default.
• W2168919294 countsByYear W21689192942015 @default.
• W2168919294 countsByYear W21689192942016 @default.
• W2168919294 countsByYear W21689192942017 @default.
• W2168919294 countsByYear W21689192942018 @default.
• W2168919294 countsByYear W21689192942019 @default.
• W2168919294 countsByYear W21689192942020 @default.
• W2168919294 countsByYear W21689192942021 @default.
• W2168919294 countsByYear W21689192942022 @default.
• W2168919294 countsByYear W21689192942023 @default.
• W2168919294 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2168919294 hasAuthorship W2168919294A5004754031 @default.
• W2168919294 hasAuthorship W2168919294A5025789949 @default.
• W2168919294 hasAuthorship W2168919294A5032325756 @default.
• W2168919294 hasAuthorship W2168919294A5046985026 @default.
• W2168919294 hasBestOaLocation W21689192941 @default.
• W2168919294 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W2168919294 hasConcept C160735492 @default.
• W2168919294 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2168919294 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2168919294 hasConcept C21333345 @default.
• W2168919294 hasConcept C512399662 @default.
• W2168919294 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2168919294 hasConcept C99454951 @default.
• W2168919294 hasConceptScore W2168919294C144133560 @default.
• W2168919294 hasConceptScore W2168919294C160735492 @default.
• W2168919294 hasConceptScore W2168919294C17744445 @default.
• W2168919294 hasConceptScore W2168919294C199539241 @default.
• W2168919294 hasConceptScore W2168919294C21333345 @default.
• W2168919294 hasConceptScore W2168919294C512399662 @default.
• W2168919294 hasConceptScore W2168919294C71924100 @default.
• W2168919294 hasConceptScore W2168919294C99454951 @default.
• W2168919294 hasLocation W21689192941 @default.
• W2168919294 hasLocation W21689192942 @default.
• W2168919294 hasOpenAccess W2168919294 @default.
• W2168919294 hasPrimaryLocation W21689192941 @default.
• W2168919294 hasRelatedWork W2100744577 @default.
• W2168919294 hasRelatedWork W2126415534 @default.
• W2168919294 hasRelatedWork W2231847643 @default.
• W2168919294 hasRelatedWork W2410798307 @default.
• W2168919294 hasRelatedWork W2432979010 @default.
• W2168919294 hasRelatedWork W2998366287 @default.
• W2168919294 hasRelatedWork W4200275845 @default.
• W2168919294 hasRelatedWork W4292012610 @default.
• W2168919294 hasRelatedWork W4311336189 @default.
• W2168919294 hasRelatedWork W4311342082 @default.
• W2168919294 hasVolume "12" @default.
• W2168919294 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2168919294 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2168919294 magId "2168919294" @default.
• W2168919294 workType "article" @default.