Finding Consens In Research: DAHTA’s Way To Priorities
H.-P.
Dauben, A.
Rüther, H. Schweim; German Agency for HTA (DAHTA) at the German Institute For Medical
Information and Documentation (DIMDI), Cologne, Germany, http://www.dahta.de
Introduction: For the
preparation of reports for Health Technology Assessment (HTA) lots of
methodological standards has to be developed. One topic with high interest to
all groups is the art of priority setting and the ranking of possible topics
for HTA-research. How can these corner points be guaranteed in a standardized,
transparent procedure in
Methods and Results: Basis for the
creation of a standard operation procedure (SOP) “Priorisation” was a
systematic literature search and an additional questioning and analysing other
national institutions with comparable health system. In total 570 literature
quotations were analysed. The specific German health care structure has to be
reflected with simultaneous consideration of the state and of the
self-administration system. The conditions should be 1st to secure
the transparency of the topic list (including the reasons for the topic), 2nd
the consideration of all groups of interest (politician, physicians, industry,
patients) and 3rd to fulfil the condition for enabling an
independent decision.
As a transparent medium of
collecting topics we therefore develop an internet-based “priority data base”
(PDB). Additionally the institutions of the German self-administration and the
political decision-making bodies are regularly written and asked for topic
suggestions. On a now following 4-step way of decision-making the members of
the scientific advisory board are asked to make a selection of 4 topics in each
case to the following four areas: 1.Prevention, 2.Diagnostics, 3.Therapy and
4.Methodology. Thereafter a reduced literature search in Medline, Embase,
Cochrane CDSR, NEED, ISTAHC and INAHTA for the topics of each area of research
is created. The abstracts are evaluated to formal criteria. The results are
rapid overviews of the availability of literature. Based on these results the
topics, which are to be examined, are elected in a common session or internet-conference
finally.
Conclusions: The described
standardized and open to the public way of priority settings in the German
Agency for Health Technology Assessment (DAHTA) represents, in our opinion, one
way to fulfil all necessary consideration of a transparent, scientific way of
creating a ranking list for research in the field of HTA. A process of
commentary and criticism of the SOP will be initiated.