Health Technology Assessment (HTA) for medical devices - Do the same rules apply?;Health Technology Assessment (HTA) im bereich der medizinprodukte - Gleiches spiel mit gleichen regeln?

Gesundheitsokonomie und Qualitatsmanagement

Volumn 14, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 144-155

  Graf Von Der Schulenburg, J Mathias ^a   Mittendorf, Thomas ^a   Kulp, W ^a   Greiner, W ^b  

^a LEIBNIZ UNIVERSITY HANNOVER   (Germany)

^b BIELEFELD UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Germany; Health technology assessment; Medical devices

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; REVIEW;

EID: 67649592503     PISSN: 14322625     EISSN: 14394049     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-2008-1027813     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. Abrantes-Metz RM, Adams CP, Metz P. Pharmaceutical Development Phases: A Duration Analysis. Report No.: 274. Washington D.C, 2004
2. Altenstetter C. EU and member state medical devices regulation. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2003; 19 (01): 228-248 (Pubitemid 36356342)
3. Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D'Amico R et al. Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technol Assess 2003; 7 (27): 1-173 (Pubitemid 37209890)
4. Dimick JB, Diener-West M, Lipsett PA. Negative results of randomized clinical trials published in the surgical literature: equivalency or error? Arch Surg 2001; 136 (7): 796-800
5. EUR-ASSESS. Report from the EUR-ASSESS Project. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1997; 13 (2): 133-143
6. Jakubowski E, Perleth M, Busse R. Final report to the directorate V/F/1: "Best practice": State of the art and perspectives in the EU for improving the effectiveness and efficiency of European health systems. Luxemburg, 1999
7. Kommission der europäischen Gemeinschaften. Mitteilung der Kommission an den Rat und das Europäische Parlament über Medizinprodukte.
8. Kunz R, Vist G, Oxmann DA. Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials (Cochrane Methodology Review). Oxford, 2002
9. Lilford RJ, Braunholtz DA, Harries J et al. Trials in surgery. British Journal of Surgery 2004; 91 (1): 6-16 (Pubitemid 38122044)
10. Macklin R. The Ethical Problems with Sham Surgery in Clinical Research. N Engl J Med 1999; 341 (13): 992-996 (Pubitemid 29441557)
11. McCulloch P, Taylor I, Sasako M et al. Randomised trials in surgery: problems and possible solutions. BMJ 2002; 324 (7351): 1448-1451
12. Perleth M. Evidenzbasierte Entscheidungsunterstützung im Gesundheitswesen. Duisburg: Wiku-Verlag, 2003
13. Phillips KA, van Bebber S, Issa AM. Diagnostics and biomarker development: priming the pipeline. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2006; 5 (6): 463-469 (Pubitemid 44136958)
14. Ramsay CR, Grant AM, Wallace SA et al. Assessment of the learning curve in health technologies. A systematic review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2000; 16 (4): 1095-1108
15. Sams HH, Chen J, King LE. Graftskin treatment of difficult to heal diabetic foot ulcers: one center's experience. Dermatol Surg 2002; 28 (8): 698-703 (Pubitemid 34913278)
16. Siebert M, Clauss LC, Carlisle M et al. Health technology assessment for medical devices in Europe. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2002; 18 (03): 733-740
17. Stevens A, Milne R. Health technology assessment in England and Wales. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2004; 20 (1): 11-24 (Pubitemid 38656957)