Qualitative research methods have the potential to provide in-depth insights into the patient experience. They can also help us understand better the context in which medical interventions will be implemented and highlight any prospective challenges patients might encounter that affect the acceptability and real-world uptake of these interventions. Because of this, they can be a valuable component of the health technology assessments (HTAs) and facilitate patient involvement with the process; but how well and in what manner are they currently being used within HTA? These are the questions explored in recent research by Broadstreet Scientific Director Shelagh Szabo and colleagues at the University of Glasgow in a poster being presented at the upcoming Society for Medical Decision Making Annual North American meeting (October 23 – October 26, 2022; Seattle, WA).
The work reviewed submissions to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) between September 2019 and September 2021 and looked at who provided input, which topics were covered, how data were collected and analyzed, and whether the submitted data were published. Each submission was ranked on a 6-point scale categorizing data availability, and whether they used formal qualitative data collection and analytic methods (see figure).
Highlights of the findings include that formal use of qualitative data collection and analytic methods remained infrequent, and when they were included, the studies tended to be inadequately described. Furthermore, peer-reviewed publication of qualitative research findings was rare. The results suggest that there is still much work to be done to improve the quality of qualitative research being incorporated in HTAs and thus, maximize the value of patient generated research.
Frequency of rankings by HTA, classifying the type and amount of patient data included
If you are at the meeting, we invite you to visit our poster titled “Using qualitative methods to inform health technology assessment: A review of submissions to NICE and CADTH” to read more.
Our second poster at the meeting explores work developed in collaboration with our colleagues at Sarepta Therapeutics. The poster, entitled “US Societal Perspectives on Prioritizing Aspects of Disease: a Discrete Choice Experiment” provides insights into which attributes of disease (e.g., reduction of life expectancy; disease severity; childhood onset) the general public in the US consider most important for research and treatment priorities. The findings from this study could help inform elements of value in future decision-making. If you are interested in reading more, the poster will be available virtually to attendees and during Poster Session 4, Wednesday, October 26, 2022, 07:00 – 08:30 pm.
