Structured expert elicitation for long-term survival outcomes in health technology assessment: a systematic review

结构化专家意见征询在卫生技术评估中对长期生存结果的影响:一项系统评价

阅读:2

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Extrapolation of immature survival data is integral to health technology assessment (HTA) but is often associated with large uncertainty. Incorporation of expert judgements can help to address this uncertainty, but often these judgements are perceived as being “best guesses” due to a lack of methodological transparency. This review assesses the current implementation and reporting of structured expert elicitation for long-term survival outcomes in the broader literature and recent submissions to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). METHODS: Three literature databases were searched: MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase, and Web of Science. The search algorithm included terms to identify articles which obtained expert judgements for survival extrapolation. A pearl-growing approach was also employed using three seed papers to supplement the electronic searches. To identify recent NICE technology appraisals in oncology, the NICE guidance database was searched. RESULTS: The search of the broader literature identified six studies which utilised structured expert elicitation for long-term survival outcomes. Four NICE technology appraisals were identified to have used structured expert elicitation between October 2023 and October 2024. The reporting and conduct of elicitation for survival quantities was variable in detail and rigour in both the broader literature and NICE submissions. Despite the requirement for significant resource investment within the process, elicited values are variably used within analyses and are predominantly used as qualitative external validation. At all points throughout the elicitation, including planning, conduct and reporting, there appears to be a considerable lack of technical detail, which in the context of NICE appraisals may hinder full consideration of the elicited values by reviewing committees. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, the methods and limited reporting structures being used to elicit long-term survival outcomes are not fit for purpose. This review highlights key areas for improvement and identifies examples of good practice when conducting structured expert elicitations for long-term survival outcomes. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-025-03221-2.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。