[Methodological project: Synthesis of information in support of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) for decision making]

Bayón Yusta J.C., Gutiérrez Iglesias A., Galnares-Cordero L., Gutiérrez-Ibarluzea I
Record ID 32018000480
Spanish
Original Title: Proyecto metodológico: Síntesis de información relevante de apoyo a los MCDA (análisis de decisión multicriterio) para la toma de decisiones
Authors' objectives: The objective of this report is to propose the implementation of analysis of ethical, organisational, legal, environmental and social domains, that is, non-core domains, in reports of HTA agencies/units, enabling the incorporation of well-informed MCDA approaches into decision making
Authors' results and conclusions: • Based on the search for scientific evidence, 42 articles reporting the use of non-core criteria for the assessment of health technologies were included in the analysis. From these articles, a total of 216 non-core criteria were retrieved and categorised into domains by the researchers, and of these, 56 were classified as socioeconomic, 59 as organisational, 10 as legal, 8 as environmental and 47 as ethical, while 36 were considered to relate to other domains. • The consensus group, based on the 216 non-core criteria obtained from the systematic review, proposed and defined 26 criteria that participants considered necessary for decision making in healthcare. Said criteria were grouped by domains as follows: five each in the ethical, legal and environmental domains, four in the socioeconomic and “others” domains, and three in the organisational domain. • Initially, only nine HTA agencies responded to the questionnaire sent to INAHTA (16.4 %). Of these, four (7.29 %) indicated that there was knowledge of MCDA approaches in their agencies and such approaches were applied, while the other five (9.11 %) indicated that there was no knowledge of such approaches in their agency. Further, in the 2018 INAHTA Congress, 34 of the agencies present confirmed that they had not implemented MCDA approaches. CONCLUSIONS • The 26 criteria selected should be taken into account by HTA agencies/units when gathering and synthesizing information for decision making on healthcare. • The consensus group did not consider that any of the domains should be given more weight than others or that any individual criteria should dominate. • It was proposed that information gathered for HTA should include all types of data needed to enable deliberative processes in decision making. • These approaches can serve as a framework of reference for a wellstructured systematic discussion concerning the basis of individual criteria and the evidence supporting them. • Well-informed structured deliberative processes may have strengths over poorly-informed and closed decision making, as they make the reasoning underlying a final decision more explicit and transparent.
Authors' methods: • To assess the scientific evidence on MCDA techniques in which non-core criteria are applied or considered for decision making on the incorporation, modification or exclusion of health technologies, a systematic review was conducted using structured searches in biomedical databases and websites of various HTA organisations. • A consensus group was held using the nominal group technique and involving users of healthcare services, providers, managers and academics, among others, with the goal of discussing the criteria that should be considered for each of the aforementioned non-core domains. • The consensus group session using the nominal group technique consisted of four steps: the generation of ideas/criteria, recording of the ideas/criteria, discussion and voting. For the final proposal, criteria were only considered if they had obtained a median of greater than or equal to 6 out of the total of 10 for the scores assigned. • A survey was sent by email to the Listserv of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) seeking to assess the degree of development of MCDA frameworks for decisionmaking processes in the countries in which its members operate.
Details
Project Status: Completed
Year Published: 2019
English language abstract: An English language summary is available
Publication Type: Other
Country: Spain
MeSH Terms
  • Decision Making, Organizational
  • Decision Support Techniques
  • Health Policy
  • Ethics
  • Technology Assessment, Biomedical
  • Decision Making
Keywords
  • Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis
  • MCDA
  • Ethics
  • Decision Making
  • Organizational
  • Technology Assessment
  • Análisis de Decisión Multicriterio
Contact
Organisation Name: Basque Office for Health Technology Assessment
Contact Address: C/ Donostia – San Sebastián, 1 (Edificio Lakua II, 4ª planta) 01010 Vitoria - Gasteiz
Contact Name: Lorea Galnares-Cordero
Contact Email: lgalnares@bioef.eus
Copyright:

Osteba (Basque Office for Health Technology Assessment) Health Department of the Basque Government

This is a bibliographic record of a published health technology assessment from a member of INAHTA or other HTA producer. No evaluation of the quality of this assessment has been made for the HTA database.