Literature DB >> 12862188

Confronting the "gray zones" of technology assessment: evaluating genetic testing services for public insurance coverage in Canada.

Mita Giacomini1, Fiona Miller, George Browman.   

Abstract

We describe an evaluation model to guide public coverage of new predictive genetic tests in Ontario, Canada. The model confronts common "gray zones" in evaluation and coverage policy for challenging new technologies. Analysis addresses three domains of the evaluation picture. The first specifies evaluative criteria (purpose, effectiveness, additional effects, unit cost, demand, cost-effectiveness). The second induces or deduces acceptable cutoffs for each criterion. The third domain addresses the need to make decisions under uncertainty and to respond to "gray" evaluations with conditional-coverage decisions. The evaluation criteria should be applied within sound decision-making processes.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Genetics and Reproduction; Health Care and Public Health

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12862188     DOI: 10.1017/s0266462303000278

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care        ISSN: 0266-4623            Impact factor:   2.188


  10 in total

Review 1.  One of these things is not like the others: the idea of precedence in health technology assessment and coverage decisions.

Authors:  Mita Giacomini
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.911

Review 2.  The challenge of developing evidence-based genetics health care in practice.

Authors:  Brenda J Wilson
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.375

3.  Why examining the desirability of health technology matters.

Authors:  Pascale Lehoux
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2008-02

4.  Criteria for fairly allocating scarce health-care resources to genetic tests: which matter most?

Authors:  Wolf H Rogowski; Scott D Grosse; Jörg Schmidtke; Georg Marckmann
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2013-08-07       Impact factor: 4.246

5.  6-STEPPPs: A Modular Tool to Facilitate Clinician Participation in Fair Decisions for Funding New Cancer Drugs.

Authors:  George P Browman; Braden Manns; Neil Hagen; Carole R Chambers; Anita Simon; Shane Sinclair
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 3.840

Review 6.  Funding decisions for newborn screening: a comparative review of 22 decision processes in Europe.

Authors:  Katharina Elisabeth Fischer; Wolf Henning Rogowski
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2014-05-19       Impact factor: 3.390

7.  How is genetic testing evaluated? A systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Erica Pitini; Corrado De Vito; Carolina Marzuillo; Elvira D'Andrea; Annalisa Rosso; Antonio Federici; Emilio Di Maria; Paolo Villari
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-02-08       Impact factor: 4.246

8.  Technology assessment and resource allocation for predictive genetic testing: a study of the perspectives of Canadian genetic health care providers.

Authors:  Alethea Adair; Robyn Hyde-Lay; Edna Einsiedel; Timothy Caulfield
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2009-06-18       Impact factor: 2.652

9.  Value-based genomic screening: exploring genomic screening for chronic diseases using triple value principles.

Authors:  Viktor Dombrádi; Erica Pitini; Carla G van El; Anant Jani; Martina Cornel; Paolo Villari; Muir Gray; Klára Bíró
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2019-11-11       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  A Systematic Review of the Value Assessment Frameworks Used within Health Technology Assessment of Omics Technologies and Their Actual Adoption from HTA Agencies.

Authors:  Ilda Hoxhaj; Laurenz Govaerts; Steven Simoens; Walter Van Dyck; Isabelle Huys; Iñaki Gutiérrez-Ibarluzea; Stefania Boccia
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 3.390

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.