Expanded HTA, legitimacy and independence: Comment on "expanded HTA: Enhancing fairness and legitimacy"
International Journal of Health Policy and Management, ISSN: 2322-5939, Vol: 5, Issue: 9, Page: 565-567
2016
- 3Citations
- 25Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations3
- Citation Indexes2
- CrossRef1
- Policy Citations1
- Policy Citation1
- Captures25
- Readers25
- 25
Article Description
This brief commentary seeks to develop the analysis of Daniels, Porteny and Urrutia of the implications of expansion of the scope of health technology assessment (HTA) beyond issues of safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness. Drawing in particular on experience in the United Kingdom, it suggests that such expansion can be understood not only as a response to the problem of insufficiency of evidence, but also to that of legitimacy. However, as expansion of HTA also renders it more visibly political in character, it is plausible that its legitimacy may be undermined, rather than enhanced by, independence from the policy process.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85002412780&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2016.75; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27694685; http://ijhpm.com/article_3220.html; https://dx.doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2016.75; https://www.ijhpm.com/article_3220.html; http://www.ijhpm.com/article_3220.html; https://www.ijhpm.com/article_3220_51dfe6b8e818fdc8751574a6f20d3faa.pdf; https://www.ijhpm.com/article_3220.html?_action=articleInfo&article=3220; https://www.ijhpm.com/?_action=articleInfo&article=3220&lang
Maad Rayan Publishing Company
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know