Title |
A systematic review of Health Technology Assessment tools in sub-Saharan Africa: methodological issues and implications
|
---|---|
Published in |
Health Research Policy and Systems, December 2014
|
DOI | 10.1186/1478-4505-12-66 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Christine Kriza, Jill Hanass-Hancock, Emmanuel Ankrah Odame, Nicola Deghaye, Rashid Aman, Philip Wahlster, Mayra Marin, Nicodemus Gebe, Willis Akhwale, Isabelle Wachsmuth, Peter L. Kolominsky-Rabas |
Abstract |
Health technology assessment (HTA) is mostly used in the context of high- and middle-income countries. Many "resource-poor" settings, which have the greatest need for critical assessment of health technology, have a limited basis for making evidence-based choices. This can lead to inappropriate use of technologies, a problem that could be addressed by HTA that enables the efficient use of resources, which is especially crucial in such settings. There is a lack of clarity about which HTA tools should be used in these settings. This research aims to provide an overview of proposed HTA tools for "resource-poor" settings with a specific focus on sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 2 | 40% |
Canada | 1 | 20% |
Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
Lebanon | 1 | <1% |
Ethiopia | 1 | <1% |
South Africa | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 137 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 19 | 13% |
Researcher | 18 | 13% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 11% |
Student > Bachelor | 11 | 8% |
Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 7% |
Other | 33 | 23% |
Unknown | 35 | 25% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 41 | 29% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 9% |
Social Sciences | 12 | 8% |
Engineering | 10 | 7% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 5% |
Other | 25 | 18% |
Unknown | 34 | 24% |