Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi), in conjunction with the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR), initiated a joint Task Force and published guideline and a checklist for deliberative processes for health technology assessment (HTA). Currently, there is a lack of guidance for designing and implementing deliberative processes of HTA in China, so this paper performs a detailed interpretation of the guideline and checklist, with a view to providing a reference for China's HTA and deliberative process, in order to promote the dissemination and application of the HTA methodology, and advance the construction of domestic HTA deliberative processes capacity and institutional mechanism.
Doctor-patient shared decision making is an expansion and extension of the patient-centered concept, which emphasizes communication and collaboration between doctors and patients in making decisions, focuses on patients, needs, enhances communication and exchange between doctors and patients, and improves the status of patients in medical decision making. This paper reviews the concept, domestic and international research overview, advantages, and application of doctor-patient shared decision making in hip and knee arthroplasty, and discusses the future research directions, in order to provide a reference for the application of shared decision making between doctors and patients in hip and knee arthroplasty in China.
Evidence-based dentistry has been established for more than a decade, and described as ‘the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients＇. However, Orthodontic clinicians in China still tend to base their treatment protocols on the ‘it works in my hands＇evidence provided by their peers, mainly due to their weak experience in searching and applying clinical evidences. In this article, authors are willing to share their experience with their Chinese peers, and to promote the dissemination and application of evidence-based orthodontics in clinical practice.
A well-conducted evidence-based guideline not only considers the efficiency and the cost of the recommended intervention, but also the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention during implementation. Systematic reviews of qualitative research aim to provide qualitative evidence such as the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention. In developing evidence-based guidelines, qualitative evidence helps to:(1) Define the scope of guideline; (2) Assess the acceptability of interventions; (3) Assess the feasibility of interventions; (4) Identify considerations when implementing guidelines. Systematic reviews provide the fundamental evidence required to develop robust and trustworthy guidelines. The CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach aims to grade the evidence from systematic reviews of qualitative research. After critically and scientifically appraising by CERQual, the acceptance and feasibility of an intervention are given different grading, which is the critical process of developing evidence-based guidelines. This paper will demonstrate the value of systematic reviews of qualitative research in developing evidence-based guidelines and how to implement recommendations from qualitative evidence.
ObjectiveTo introduce economic evaluation methods for anticancer-drugs with basket trial design, and to provide references for related research and decision-making. MethodsA case analysis was conducted on economic evaluation methods for anticancer-drugs with basket trial design, which was issued by Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) in the Economic Guidance Report. Moreover, both the advantages and disadvantages of the methods were analyzed in accordance with the characteristics of basket trials. ResultsPooled analysis and tumor-specific analysis were two methods frequently employed in the case analysis. However, great uncertainties were available in both of them. The uncertainty of the former was mainly reflected in the heterogeneity of the targeted population, while the uncertainty of the latter was mainly shown in the insufficient sample size of the subgroup. ConclusionCurrently, economic evaluation methods for anticancer-drugs with basket trial design are immature. Thus, researchers are required to explore the methods of innovation evaluation with lower uncertainty; reimbursement decision-makers should fully consider the uncertainty of evaluation results and enterprises should collect the real-world data for the demands of evaluation to promote the reasonable allocation of healthcare resources in China.
The Campbell Library is a database of preserving and promoting systematic reviews on social sciences for the purpose of providing evidence-informed decision making. This article introduces the foundation, development, major contents and search methods of the Campbell Library, so as to provide resources and technologies in the field of social sciences as well as new ideas for the development of evidence-based practice in China.
Shared decision making (SDM), as a healthcare service model, requires clinical practice to follow the “patient-centred” medical principle and emphasizes patient participation in the medical decision-making process, which promotes medical equality and improves the quality and effectiveness of healthcare services. However, its methodology has not yet been introduced into the field of Chinese medicine (CM), and there is still a lack of clear guidance on how to implement SDM in clinical practice. This study provided the method of establishing the conceptual framework of SDM in CM, introducing multiple methods according to evidence-based medicine, and conducing an implementation study to explore the applicability of SDM model in CM clinical practice, with the aim of providing references for the application of the SDM in the clinical practice of CM in the future.