Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
Type: Journal article
Title: What's in a name? developing definitions for common health technology assessment product types of the international network of agencies for health technology assessment (Inahta)
Author: Merlin, T.
Tamblyn, D.
Ellery, B.
NAHTA Quality Assurance Group
Citation: International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 2014; 30(4):430-437
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Issue Date: 2014
ISSN: 0266-4623
Statement of
Tracy Merlin, David Tamblyn, Benjamin Ellery and the INAHTA Quality Assurance Group
Abstract: Objectives: A mapping exercise was undertaken to determine how HTA is being described and conducted across the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA), with the aim of harmonizing terminologies and approaches. Methods: Three progressive surveys were undertaken. In 2010, INAHTA agencies were asked to provide details on all of their HTA products. In 2013, additional information was sought on key methodological characteristics of five of the most common HTA product types. Subsequently, final agreement was sought on three proposed product types. Results: Forty-five HTA agencies responded to at least one of the surveys. In 2010, twenty-one agencies reported publishing over seventy named HTA products. Core domains associated with full HTA reports were reported by a third of agencies but were labeled differently, so products were classified according to product type (n =17). Agencies producing short, tailored products increased between 2010 and 2013, with the publication of rapid reviews doubling from 33 percent to 66 percent. In 2013, half of the agencies adapted their common HTA products from documents produced by other agencies. A consensus (>70 percent) was achieved on definitions for HTA reports, mini-HTAs, and rapid reviews. Conclusions: The product label for an HTA is not always indicative of its content. Terminology has, therefore, been agreed to make explicit the trade-off between rigor and timeliness in three common HTA product types. An INAHTA Product Type (IPT) Mark has been created to identify each of these. It is hoped this will further facilitate HTA adaptation between agencies and reduce duplication of effort.
Keywords: Technology Assessment; Biomedical/standards; Technology Assessment; Biomedical/methods; Terminology as Topic; Policy Making/standards; Health Policy/standards
Rights: © Cambridge University Press 2014. The online version of this article is published within an Open Access environment subject to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence <>. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use
RMID: 0030024775
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462314000543
Appears in Collections:Public Health publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
hdl_96114.pdfPublished version685.51 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.