The Bright Elusive Butterfly of Value in Health Technology Development; Comment on “Providing Value to New Health Technology: The Early Contribution of Entrepreneurs, Investors, and Regulatory Agencies”

Publish Year: 1397
نوع سند: مقاله ژورنالی
زبان: English
View: 37

This Paper With 5 Page And PDF Format Ready To Download

  • Certificate
  • من نویسنده این مقاله هستم

استخراج به نرم افزارهای پژوهشی:

لینک ثابت به این Paper:

شناسه ملی سند علمی:

JR_HPM-7-1_011

تاریخ نمایه سازی: 18 مرداد 1403

Abstract:

The current system of health technology development is characterised by multiple misalignments. The “supply” side (innovation policy-makers, entrepreneurs, investors) and the “demand” side (health policy-makers, regulators, health technology assessment, purchasers) operate under different – and conflicting – logics. The system is less a “pathway” than an unstable ecosystem of multiple interacting sub-systems. “Value” means different things to each of the numerous actors involved. Supply-side dynamics are built on fictions; regulatory checks and balances are designed to assure quality, safety and efficacy, not to ensure that technologies entering the market are either desirable or cost-effective. Assessment of comparative and cost-effectiveness usually comes too late in the process to shape an innovation’s development.   We offer no simple solutions to these problems, but in the spirit of commencing a much-needed public debate, we suggest some tentative ways forward. First, universities and public research funders should play a more proactive role in shaping the system. Second, the role of industry in forging long-term strategic partnerships for public benefit should be acknowledged (though not uncritically). Third, models of “responsible innovation” and public input to research priority-setting should be explored. Finally, the evidence base on how best to govern inter-sectoral health research partnerships should be developed and applied.

Authors

Trisha Greenhalgh

Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Nick Fahy

Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Sara Shaw

Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

مراجع و منابع این Paper:

لیست زیر مراجع و منابع استفاده شده در این Paper را نمایش می دهد. این مراجع به صورت کاملا ماشینی و بر اساس هوش مصنوعی استخراج شده اند و لذا ممکن است دارای اشکالاتی باشند که به مرور زمان دقت استخراج این محتوا افزایش می یابد. مراجعی که مقالات مربوط به آنها در سیویلیکا نمایه شده و پیدا شده اند، به خود Paper لینک شده اند :
  • Lehoux P, Miller FA, Daudelin G, Denis JL. Providing value ...
  • Lehoux P, Daudelin G, Williams-Jones B, Denis J-L, Longo C. ...
  • Lehoux P, Miller F, Daudelin G, Urbach D. How venture ...
  • Lehoux P, Daudelin G, Hivon M, Miller FA, Denis JL. ...
  • Lehoux P. Why examining the desirability of health technology matters. Healthc ...
  • Lehoux P. The duality of health technology in chronic illness: ...
  • Lehoux P, Daudelin G, Demers-Payette O, Boivin A. Fostering deliberations ...
  • Lehoux P, Denis JL, Rock M, Hivon M, Tailliez S. ...
  • Scott WR. Institutions and Organizations: Ideas, Interests, and Identities. Sage Publications; ...
  • Chesbrough H, Rosenbloom RS. The role of the business model ...
  • Leonardi PM, Barley SR. What’s under construction here? Social action, ...
  • Brown N. Hope against hype-accountability in biopasts, presents and futures. Science ...
  • Markiewicz K, van Til JA, MJ IJ. Medical devices early ...
  • HM Treasury Department of Culture MaS. Next Generation Mobile Technologies: A ...
  • Greenhalgh T, Swinglehurst D, Stones R. Rethinking ‘resistance’ to big ...
  • Grunwald A. Responsible innovation: bringing together technology assessment, applied ethics, ...
  • Von Schomberg R. A vision of responsible research and innovation. ...
  • Owen R, Macnaghten P, Stilgoe J. Responsible research and innovation: ...
  • Stilgoe J, Owen R, Macnaghten P. Developing a framework for ...
  • UK Department of Health (NHS Improvement and Efficiency Directorate). Innovation, Health ...
  • Smith J. Technological innovation in health care: Report of the Standing ...
  • Garber S, Gates S, Keeler EB, et al. Redirecting Innovation in ...
  • Bienkowska-Gibbs T, Exley J, Saunders CL, et al. Evaluating the ...
  • Naylor D, Fraser N, Girard F, Jenkins T, Mintz J, ...
  • Walshe K, McKee M, McCarthy M, et al. Health systems ...
  • Edgerton D. Time for evidence based research policy. British Medical ...
  • Emanuel EJ. The future of biomedical research. JAMA. ۲۰۱۳;۳۰۹(۱۵):۱۵۸۹-۱۵۹۰ ...
  • Walshe K, McKee M, Groenewegen P, et al. Reshaping the ...
  • Greenhalgh T, Russell J. Why do evaluations of ehealth programs ...
  • Lowe C. Telehealth Soapbox: Time to bid farewell to the ...
  • Petit-Zeman S, Firkins L, Scadding JW. The James Lind Alliance: ...
  • Deane KH, Flaherty H, Daley DJ, et al. Priority setting ...
  • Chalmers I, Bracken MB, Djulbegovic B, et al. How to ...
  • Greenhalgh T, Wherton J, Sugarhood P, Hinder S, Procter R, ...
  • Greenhalgh T, Stramer K, Bratan T, et al. The Devil's in ...
  • Villa S, Compagni A, Reich MR. Orphan drug legislation: lessons ...
  • Hanney S, Kuruvilla S, Soper B, Mays N. Who needs ...
  • Ferlie E, Fitzgerald L, McGivern G, Dopson S, Bennett C. Making ...
  • Ramaswamy V, Ozcan K. The Co-creation Paradigm. Stanford University Press; ۲۰۱۴ ...
  • نمایش کامل مراجع