INTEGRATING ETHICS IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT: MANY WAYS TO ROME

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 31, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 131-137

  Hofmann, Björn ^a   Oortwijn, Wija ^b   Bakke Lysdahl, Kristin ^a   Refolo, Pietro ^c   Sacchini, Dario ^c   Van Der Wilt, Gert Jan ^d   Gerhardus, Ansgar ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^b ECORYS Netherlands   (Netherlands)

^c CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY   (Italy)

^d RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^e UNIVERSITY OF BREMEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Ethics; Health Technology Assessment; Morals; Norms; Values

Indexed keywords

ETHICAL ASPECTS; HEALTH; INTEGRATION;

HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENTS; IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS; MORAL PHILOSOPHY; MORALS; NORMS; TRADITIONAL APPROACHES; VALUES;

PHILOSOPHICAL ASPECTS;

ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; CASUISTRY; CONSENSUS; CONSTRUCTIVE TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DEONTOLOGY; DISCOURSE ETHICS; ETHICAL DECISION MAKING; ETHICAL MATRIX; ETHICS; EUROPEAN NETWORK FOR HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT CORE MODEL; INTERACTIVE HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; ITALY; MEDICAL ETHICS; MORALITY; PHILOSOPHY; PRINCIPLISM; SOCIAL SHAPING OF TECHNOLOGY; SOCRATIC APPROACH; STANDARDIZATION; UTILITARIANISM; WIDE REFLECTIVE EQUILIBRIUM; HUMAN; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT;

ETHICAL ANALYSIS; HUMANS; ITALY; MORALS; PHILOSOPHY, MEDICAL; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 84937642788     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: 14716348     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462315000276     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Banta HD. Foreword. Poiesis Prax. 2004;2:93-95.
2. Banta HD, Perry S. A history of ISTAHC. A personal perspective on its first 10 years. International Society of Technology Assessment in Health Care. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1997;13:430-453; discussion 54-62.
3. Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). Development of medical technologies: Opportunities for assessment. Washington, DC: United States Congress; 1976.
4. Liberati A, Sheldon TA, Banta HD. EUR-ASSES Project Subgroup. Report on methodology: Methodological guidance for the conduct of health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1997;13:186-219.
5. Jonsson E, Banta HD, Henshall C, et al. Summary report of the ECHTA/ECAHI project. European Collaboration for Health Technology Assessment/Assessment of Health Interventions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2002;18:218-237.
6. International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment. Technology assessment. Alberta, Canada: HTA Resources: International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment; 2011.
7. Burls A, Caron L, Cleret de Langavant G, et al. Tackling ethical issues in health technology assessment: A proposed framework. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2011;27:230-237. doi: 10.1017/S0266462311000250.
8. Saarni SI, Braunack-Mayer A, Hofmann B, et al. Different methods for ethical analysis in health technology assessment: An empirical study. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2011;27(4):305-312. doi: 10.1017/S0266462311000444.
9. th Annual Meeting HTAi RDS Conference Center Dublin, Ireland, 2010.
10. Hofmann BM. Why ethics should be part of health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24:423-429. doi: 10.1017/S0266462308080550.
11. Lavis J, Wilson M, Grimshaw J, et al. Towards optimally packaged and relevance assessed health technology assessments. Report Submitted to the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Healthcare. Hamilton, Ontario: McMaster University Program in Policy Decision-Making; 2007.
12. DeJean D, Giacomini M, Schwartz L, et al. Ethics in Canadian health technology assessment: A descriptive review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25:463-469. doi: 10.1017/s0266462309990390.
13. Assasi N, Schwartz L, Tarride JE, et al. Methodological guidance documents for evaluation of ethical considerations in health technology assessment: A systematic review. Exp Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2014;14:203-220. doi: 10.1586/14737167.2014.894464.
14. ten Have H. Ethical perspectives on health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20:71-76.
15. Hofmann B. Ethical challenges with welfare technology: A review of the literature. Sci Eng Ethics. 2013;19:389-406. doi: 10.1007/s11948-011-9348-1.
16. Zon M. Nederlandse organisatie voor gezondheidsonderzoek en zorginnovatie. Informatiebrochure DoelmatigheidsOnderzoek. Subsidieronde. 2012. Den Haag, 2010. Available via: http://www.zonmw.nl/uploads/tx-vipublicaties/Brochure-2012-binnenwerk.pdf (accessed January 22, 2015).
17. Hofmann B. Ethical aspects of bariatric treatment of adult obesity. Alberta, Canada: Institute of Health Economics; 2011.
18. Kheiraoui F, de Waure C, Specchia M, et al. The 13-valent pneumococcal conjugated vaccine introduction in subjects aged >50 years: The result of a Health Technology Assessment: Flavia Kheiraoui. Eur J Public Health. 2013;23(Suppl 1). doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckt124.117.
19. Reuzel RP, van der Wilt GJ, ten Have HA, et al. Reducing normative bias in health technology assessment: Interactive evaluation and casuistry. Med Health Care Philos. 1999;2:255-263.
20. Reuzel RP, van der Wilt GJ, ten Have HA, et al. Interactive technology assessment and wide reflective equilibrium. J Med Philos. 2001;26:245-261. doi: 10.1076/jmep.26.3.245.3015.
21. Lampe K, Makela M, Garrido MV, 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. doi: 10.1017/S0266462309990638.
22. Hofmann B. Toward a procedure for integrating moral issues in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005;21:312-318.
23. Hofmann B, Droste S, Oortwijn W, et al. Harmonization of ethics in health technology assessment: A revision of the Socratic approach. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2014;30:3-9. doi: 10.1017/S0266462313000688.
24. Petticrew M, Anderson L, Elder R, et al. Complex interventions and their implications for systematic reviews: A pragmatic approach. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:1209-1214. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.06.004.