Health technology assessments: What do differing conclusions tell us?

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 341, Issue 7781, 2010, Pages 1029-1031

  Kristensen, Finn Børlum ^a,b   Gerhardus, Ansgar ^c  

^a European Network for Health Technology Assessment   (Denmark)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

^c BIELEFELD UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

WART VIRUS VACCINE;

ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; EUROPE; HUMAN; POLICY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; VACCINATION;

DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; EUROPE; GOVERNMENT AGENCIES; HUMANS; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; PAPILLOMAVIRUS INFECTIONS; PAPILLOMAVIRUS VACCINES; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 78349285597     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c5236     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Kristensen FB, Lampe K, Chase DL, Lee-Robin SH, Wild C, Moharra M, et al. Practical tools and methods for health technology assessment in Europe: the common planning, development, and piloting of structures, methodologies, and tools by the European Network for HTA, EUnetHTA. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2009;25(suppl 2):1-8.
2. International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment. Members. www.inahta.org/Members/.
3. International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment. HTA checklist. www.inahta.org /HTA/Checklist/.
4. Haug C. The risks and benefits of HPV vaccination. JAMA 2009;302:795-6.
5. Lippman A. Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and the development of public policies. J Epidemiol Community Health 2008;62:570-1.
6. Rothman SM, Rothman DJ. Marketing HPV vaccine: implications for adolescent health and medical professionalism. JAMA 2009;302:781-6.
7. Zechmeister I, Freiesleben de Blasio B, Radlberger P, Wild C, Kvas E, Garnett G, et al. Ökonomische Evaluation der Impfung gegen humane Papillomaviren (HPV-Impfung) in Österreich. Ludwig Boltzmann Institut, 2007.
8. Thiry N, Lambert M-L, Cleemput I, Huybrechts M, Neyt M, Hulstaert F, et al. HPV vaccination for the prevention of cervical cancer in Belgium: health technology assessment. Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre, 2008.
9. National Board of Health of Denmark. Reduction in the risk of cervical cancer by vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) - a health technology assessment. Sundhedsstyrelsen, 2007.
10. Health Information and Quality Authority. The role of human papillomavirus vaccines in reducing the risk of cervical cancer in Ireland. A health technology assessment. HIQA, 2008.
11. Nilsen E, Alfsen CG, Feiring B, Skjeldestad FE, Steen R, Sæterdal I. Vaksiner mot humant papillomavirus (HPV). Vurdering av effekt av profylaktiske HPV-vaksiner. Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, 2007.
12. Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care. Allmän barnvaccination mot HPV 16 och 18 i syfte att förebygga livmoderhalscancer. SBU, 2008.
13. Gerhardus A, Razum O. A long story made too short: surrogate variables and the communication of HPV vaccine trial results. J Epidemiol Community Health 2010;64:377-8.
14. De Kok IM, van Ballegooijen M, Habbema JD. Cost-effectiveness analysis of human papillomavirus vaccination in the Netherlands. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009;101:1083-92.
15. Lampe K, Mäkelä M, Garrido MV, Anttila H, Autti-Rämö I, Hicks NJ, et al. The HTA core model - a novel method for producing and reporting health technology assessments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2009;25(suppl 2):9-20.
16. Hutton J, Trueman P, Facey K. Harmonization of evidence requirements for health technology assessment in reimbursement decision making. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2008;24:511-7.
17. Godlee F. We want raw data, now. BMJ 2009;339:b5405.
18. Eisenberg JM. Globalize the evidence, localize the decision: evidence-based medicine and international diversity. Health Aff 2002;21:166-8.