Priority setting for horizon scanning of new health technologies in Denmark: Views of health care stakeholders and health economists

Health Policy

Volumn 76, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 334-345

  Douw, Karla ^a   Vondeling, Hindrik ^a   Oortwijn, Wija ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

^b RAND CORPORATION   (United States)

Author keywords

Denmark; Health technology assessment; Horizon Scanning Systems; Priority setting

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; ARTICLE; DENMARK; HEALTH CARE ACCESS; HEALTH CARE NEED; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HEALTH SURVEY; INSTRUMENT; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY;

ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; DATA COLLECTION; DENMARK; HEALTH PRIORITIES; NATIONAL HEALTH PROGRAMS; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 33645930042     PISSN: 01688510     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2005.06.016     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Hagenfeldt K., Asua J., Bellucci S., Jensen M.F., Morland B., Oortwijn W., et al. Systems for routine information sharing in HTA. Working group 2 report. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 18 (2002) 273-320
2. Jørgensen T., and Carlsson P. Introduction. Special section: early identification and assessment of emerging health technology. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 14 (1998) 603-606
3. EuroScan. Terminology and understanding of the activity: prioritisation criteria. http://www.euroscan.bham.ac.uk/, accessed on: 14.05.2004.
4. Sassi F. Setting priorities for the evaluation of health interventions: when theory does not meet practice. Health Policy 63 (2003) 141-154
5. In: Donaldson M.S., and Sox H.C. (Eds). Setting priorities for health technology assessment: a model process (1992), National Academy Press, Washington, DC
6. Douw K., Vondeling H., Sørensen J., Jørgensen T., and Sigmund H. The future should not take us by surprise: preparation of an Early Warning System in Denmark. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 20 (2004) 342-350
7. Eddy D.M. Selecting technologies for assessment. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 5 (1989) 485-501
8. Lara M.E., and Goodman C. National priorities for the assessment of clinical conditions and medical technologies (1990), National Academy Press, Washington, DC
9. Rico R., and Asua J. The prioritisation of evaluation topics of health (1996), Osteba, Vitoria Gasteiz
10. Buxton M., and Hanney S. How can payback from health services research be assessed?. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy 1 (1996) 35-43
11. In: Henshall C., Oortwijn W., Stevens A., Granados A., and Banta D. (Eds). Priority setting for health technology assessment. Theoretical considerations and practical approaches. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 13 (1997) 144-185
12. Oortwijn W.J., Vondeling H., Barneveld T., Van Vugt C., and Bouter L.M. Priority setting for health technology assessment in The Netherlands: principles and practice. Health Policy 62 (2002) 227-242
13. Oortwijn W.J., Ament AJHA, and Vondeling H. Use of societal criteria in evaluation of medical technology assessment research proposals in The Netherlands: development and testing of a checklist. Zeitschrift für Gesundheitswissenschaften. Journal of Public Health 4 (1996) 5-19
14. Danish National Board of Health. Mission & Vision. http://www.sst.dk/Om_os/Mission_og_vision.aspx?lang=en, accessed on: 04.05.2004.
15. Mooney G. Key issues in health economics (1994), Harvester, Wheatsheaf, London
16. McDaid D., Cookson R., Maynard A., and Sassi F. Evaluating health interventions in the 21st century: old and new challenges. Health Policy 63 (2003) 117-120
17. In: Culyer A.J., and Newhouse J.P. (Eds). Handbook of health economics vol. 1A and 1B (2000), North Holland, Elsevier Science Ltd., Amsterdam
18. Drummond M., O'Brien B., Stoddart G.L., and Torrance G.W. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 2nd ed. (1997), Oxford University Press, Oxford
19. Byford S., and Raftery J. Perspectives in economic evaluation. British Medical Journal 316 (1998) 1529-1530
20. Trueman P., Drummond M., and Hutton J. Developing guidance for budget impact analysis. PharmacoEconomics 19 (2001) 609-621
21. Mooney G. Economics, medicine and health care (1992), Harvester, Wheatsheaf, London
22. Laupacis A. What can we learn from cost-of-illness studies?. The Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology 16 (2002) 687-688
23. In: Kielhorn A., and Graf-von der Schulenburg J.M. (Eds). The health economics handbook (2000), Adis, Chester
24. Wiseman V., and Mooney G. Burden of illness estimates for priority setting: a debate revisited. Health Policy 43 (1998) 243-251
25. Mitton C.R. Priority setting for decision makers: using health economics in practice. The European Journal of Health Economics 3 (2002) 240-243
26. Mahapatra P. Priority-setting in the health sector and summary measures of health. In: Murray CJL, Salomon J.A., Mathers C.D., and Lopez A.D. (Eds). Summaries of population health. Concepts, ethics and applications (2002), World Health Organisation, Geneva 83-89
27. Brundtland G.H. Speech on burden of disease concept (15 December 1998), World Health Organisation, Geneva
28. Rice D. Cost-of-illness studies: fact or fiction?. The Lancet 344 (1994) 1519-1520
29. Iversen P. Why not take wise decisions? The importance of clinical and economic evidence when setting priorities on new interventions in the Danish health care system. Why are so few health economic evaluations used for priority setting and decision making? Ph.D. thesis. Odense: University of Southern Denmark Press; 2003. p. 44-61 [chapter 4].
30. Vondeling H., and Iversen P.B. Reimbursement of glitazones in treatment of type 2 diabetes patients in Denmark in the context of a voluntary system for submitting pharmacoeconomic studies. The European Journal of Health Economics 5 (2004) 263-269
31. DACEHTA-Danish Centre for Evaluation and Health Technology Assessment. Type 2-diabetes: health technology assessment of screening, diagnosis and treatment. Copenhagen: Schultz; 2003 [in Danish].
32. Adrales G.L., Chu U.B., Hoskins J.D., Witzke D.B., and Park A.E. Development of a valid, cost-effective laparoscopic training program. American Journal of Surgery 187 (2004) 157-163
33. McCormick P.H., Tanner W.A., Keane F.B., and Tierney S. Minimally invasive techniques in common surgical procedures: implications for training. Irish Journal of Medical Science 172 (2003) 27-29
34. Hurley J. The normative economics of health and health care. In: Culyer A.J., and Newhouse J.P. (Eds). Handbook of health economics vol. 1A (2000), North Holland, Elsevier Science Ltd., Amsterdam 56-118
35. Hoffmann C., Graf-von der Schulenburg J.M., and The EUROMET group. The influence of economic evaluation studies on decision making: a European survey. Health Policy 52 (2000) 179-192
36. Hoffmann C., Stoykova B.A., Nixon J., Glanville J.M., Misso K., and Drummond M.F. Do health-care decision makers find economic evaluations useful? The findings of focus group research in UK health authorities. Value in Health 5 (2002) 71-78
37. Orlewska E., and Mierzejewski P. Proposal of Polish guidelines for conducting financial analysis and their comparison to existing guidance on budget impact in other countries. Value in Health 7 (2004) 1-10
38. Nuijten M.J., and Rutten F. Combining a budgetary-impact analysis and a cost-effectiveness analysis using decision-analytic modelling techniques. PharmacoEconomics 20 (2002) 855-867
39. Rutten F. Health technology assessment and policy from the economic perspective. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 20 (2004) 67-70
40. Pedersen KMP. A better health care sector-but how? Copenhagen: Lægeforeningens Forlag; 1995 [in Danish].
41. Rasmussen L.L. A transparent health care system. Ugeskrift for Læger 166 (2004) 296-299 [in Danish]
42. Carlsson KS. Equality of access in health care. Lund Economic Studies nr. 86. Malmö: Team Offset & Media; 1999.
43. Hauck K., Smith P.C., and Goddard M. The economics of priority setting for health care: a literature review (2003), The World Bank, Washington, DC
44. Fink A. The survey handbook. 2nd ed. (2003), Sage Publications Inc., California
45. Al M.J., Feenstra T., and Brouwer W.B.F. Decision makers' views on health care objectives and budget constraints: results from a pilot study. Health Policy 70 (2004) 33-48