|
Methods used in producing a product or delivering a service |
||||
| Characteristics |
Organizations producing CPGs (n = 31) |
Organizations producing HTAs (n = 19) |
Organizations producing CPGs and HTAs (n = 45) |
Organizations supporting government policymaking (n = 57) |
|
|
||||
| Types of information provided to the panel or employed* |
||||
|
|
||||
| Systematic reviews |
31 (100%) |
16 (84%) |
42 (93%) |
49 (86%) |
|
|
||||
| Economic evaluations |
15 (48%) |
15 (79%) |
24 (53%) |
34 (60%) |
|
|
||||
| Decision analyses |
13 (42%) |
9 (47%) |
23 (51%) |
29 (51%) |
|
|
||||
| Existing burden of disease/illness |
26 (84%) |
17 (89%) |
34 (76%) |
38 (67%) |
|
|
||||
| Existing practice patterns |
21 (68%) |
14 (74%) |
33 (73%) |
33 (58%) |
|
|
||||
| Existing guidelines (or HTAs) |
30 (97%) |
15 (79%) |
41 (91%) |
38 (67%) |
|
|
||||
| Resource constraints |
11 (35%) |
10 (53%) |
18 (40%) |
26 (46%) |
|
|
||||
| Commissioned research |
- |
- |
- |
27 (47%) |
|
|
||||
| Other |
7 (23%) |
5 (26%) |
9 (20%) |
10 (18%) |
|
|
||||
| Explicit valuation process used* |
||||
|
|
||||
| Evidence is prioritized by its quality |
30 (97%) |
17 (89%) |
41 (91%) |
40 (70%) |
|
|
||||
| Outcomes are prioritized by their importance to those affected |
19 (61%) |
10 (53%) |
28 (52%) |
39 (68%) |
|
|
||||
| Groups are prioritized by their importance to achieving equity objectives |
8 (26%) |
0 (0%) |
11 (24%) |
27 (47%) |
|
|
||||
| Methods used to formulate recommendations* |
||||
|
|
||||
| Subjective review |
5 (16%) |
5 (26%) |
12 (27%) |
26 (46%) |
|
|
||||
| Informal consensus |
10 (32%) |
9 (47%) |
11 (24%) |
28 (49%) |
|
|
||||
| Formal consensus (e.g., nominal group or Delphi techniques) |
18 (58%) |
3 (16%) |
19 (42%) |
29 (51%) |
|
|
||||
| Graded according to the quality of the evidence and/or the strength of the recommendation (using an explicit rating scheme) |
26 (84%) |
12 (63%) |
34 (76%) |
31 (54%) |
|
|
||||
| Explicit assessments used in formulating recommendations* |
||||
|
|
||||
| Quality of evidence |
29 (94%) |
16 (84%) |
43 (96%) |
41 (72%) |
|
|
||||
| Trade-offs between benefits and harms |
20 (65%) |
9 (47%) |
35 (78%) |
35 (61%) |
|
|
||||
| Costs |
14 (45%) |
12 (63%) |
30 (67%) |
31 (54%) |
|
|
||||
| Equity |
9 (29%) |
6 (32%) |
21 (47%) |
27 (47%) |
|
|
||||
| Review processes used* |
||||
|
|
||||
| Clinical or policy validation (e.g., pilot testing, trial implementation period) |
9 (29%) |
3 (16%) |
11 (24%) |
24 (42%) |
|
|
||||
| Comparison with products or input from other groups |
15 (48%) |
5 (26%) |
27 (60%) |
19 (33%) |
|
|
||||
| Internal review |
26 (84%) |
17 (89%) |
38 (84%) |
41 (72%) |
|
|
||||
| External review by experts |
24 (77%) |
16 (84%) |
42 (93%) |
43 (75%) |
|
|
||||
| External review by target users |
18 (58%) |
5 (26%) |
21 (47%) |
23 (40%) |
|
*More than one answer was possible for the question | ||||
Lavis et al. Implementation Science 2008 3:54 doi:10.1186/1748-5908-3-54 |
||||