Expanding the scientific basis of health technology assessment: A research agenda for the next decade

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 22, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 275-280

  Battista, Renaldo N ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Health technology assessment; Knowledge transfer translation; Methodological developments; Models of HTA practice; Scientific basis

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; HEALTH; KNOWLEDGE ENGINEERING; PUBLIC POLICY; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; TRANSLATION (LANGUAGES);

HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT (HTA); METHODOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; MODELS OF HTA PRACTICE; SCIENTIFIC BASIS;

TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING;

ANALYTICAL RESEARCH; ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; DECISION MAKING; EVALUATION RESEARCH; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH CARE POLICY; INDIVIDUALIZATION; MACHINE; MEDICAL INSTRUMENTATION; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; METHODOLOGY; SCIENCE; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT;

DIFFUSION OF INNOVATION; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; RESEARCH; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 33749158248     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: 14716348     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462306051130     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research. A study of the impact of 2001-2002 health technology assessment products - final report. IP-15 Information Paper, 2003:34.
2. Banta HD, Gelband H, Jonsson E, Battista RN. (guest editors). Health care technology and its assessment in eight countries: Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, United Kingdom, United States. Health Policy (special issue). 1994;30:1-423.
3. Battista RN, Vineis P, Hodge MJ. Medicine, practice and guidelines: The uneasy juncture of science and art. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995;48:875-880.
4. Battista RN, Hodge MJ. Putting the genome to work: Testing for genetic disease and implications for health services. In: The economic aspects of biotechnologies related to human health. Biotechnology and medical innovation: Socio-economic assessment of the technology, the potential and the products. Paris: OECD; 1997:149-231.
5. Battista RN, Hodge MJ. The evolving paradigm of health technology assessment: Reflections for the millennium. CMAJ. 1999;160:1464-1467.
6. Bero LA, Grilli R, Grimshaw JM, et al. Closing the gap between research and practice: An overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. BMJ. 1998;317:465-468.
7. Blancquaert I, Cleret De Langavant G, Bouchard L, et al. L'encadrement du transfert technologique en génétique moléculaire - Un défi à relever. ISUMA, Revue canadienne de recherche sur les politiques. 2001;2:95-101.
8. Blancquaert I, Cleret De Langavant G, Bouchard L. L'évaluation des technologies de la santé à l'ère de la génomique. Le défi de la complexité. Revue transdisciplinaire en santé- Ruptures. 2002;9:22-38.
9. Coons SJ. Disease management: Definitions and exploration of issues. Clin Ther. 1996;18:1321-1326.
10. Davis DA, Taylor-Vaisey A. Translating guidelines into practice. CMAJ. 1997;157:408-416.
11. Denis JL, Lehoux P, Champagne F. A knowledge utilization perspective on fine-tuning dissemination and contextualizing knowledge. In: Lemieux-Charles L, Champagne F, eds. Using knowledge and evidence in health care: Multidisciplinary perspectives. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; 2004:18-40.
12. Epstein RE, Sherwood LM. From outcomes research to disease management: A guide for the perplexed. Ann Intern Med. 1996;124:832-837.
13. Gibbons M, Limoges C, Nowotny H. The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage; 1994.
14. Goering P, Butterill D, Jacobson N, et al. Linkage and exchange at the organizational level: A model of collaboration between research and policy. Health Serv Res Policy. 2003;8:14-19.
15. Grimshaw JM, Russell IT. Effect of clinical guidelines on medical practice: A systematic review of rigorous evaluations. Lancet. 1993;342:1317-1322.
16. Hailey D, Kristensen FB. The current status of the INAHTA project. Impact of HTA in Policy and Practice - The experiences of the INHTA Agencies. HTAi 2004 Pre-conference Workshop on Impact. Power Point Presentation. Available at: www.inahta.org/inahta_web/.
17. Hivon M, Lehoux P, Denis JL, et al. The use of health technology assessment (HTA) in decision-making: The co-responsibility of users and producers? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005;21:268-275.
18. Jacob R, Mc Gregor M. Assessing the impact of health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1997;13:68-80.
19. Lavis JN, Ross SE, Hurley JE, et al. Examining the role of health services research in public policy-making. Milbank Q. 2002;80:125-154.
20. Lavis JN, Robertson D, Woodside JM, et al. How can research organizations more effectively transfer research knowledge to decision makers? Milbank Q. 2003;81:221-248.
21. Lomas J. Postcript: Understanding evidence-based decision-making - or why keyboards are irrational. In: Lemieux-Charles L, Champagne F, eds. Using knowledge and evidence in health care: Multidisciplinary perspectives. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; 2004: 258 p.
22. Luce BR, Brown RE. The use of technology assessment by hospitals, health maintenance organizations, and third-party payers in the United-States. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1995;11:79-92.
23. Montague T. Patients first-closing the health care gap in Canada. Canada: John Wiley & Sons Canada Ltd; 2004.
24. Murphy E, Dingwall R, Greatbatch D, Parker S, Watson P. Qualitative research methods in health technology assessment: A review of the literature. Health Technol Assess. 1998;2:1-274.
25. Ross SE, Lavis JN, Rodriguez C, et al. Partnership experiences: Involving decision-makers in the research process. Health Serv Res Policy. 2003;8:26-34.