| Title |
The Future of Precision Medicine: Potential Impacts for Health Technology Assessment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PharmacoEconomics, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40273-018-0686-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
James Love-Koh, Alison Peel, Juan Carlos Rejon-Parrilla, Kate Ennis, Rosemary Lovett, Andrea Manca, Anastasia Chalkidou, Hannah Wood, Matthew Taylor |
| Abstract |
Precision medicine allows healthcare interventions to be tailored to groups of patients based on their disease susceptibility, diagnostic or prognostic information, or treatment response. We analysed what developments are expected in precision medicine over the next decade and considered the implications for health technology assessment (HTA) agencies. We performed a pragmatic literature search to account for the large size and wide scope of the precision medicine literature. We refined and enriched these results with a series of expert interviews up to 1 h in length, including representatives from HTA agencies, research councils and researchers designed to cover a wide spectrum of precision medicine applications and research. We identified 31 relevant papers and interviewed 13 experts. We found that three types of precision medicine are expected to emerge in clinical practice: complex algorithms, digital health applications and 'omics'-based tests. These are expected to impact upon each stage of the HTA process, from scoping and modelling through to decision-making and review. The complex and uncertain treatment pathways associated with patient stratification and fast-paced technological innovation are central to these effects. Innovation in precision medicine promises substantial benefits but will change the way in which some health services are delivered and evaluated. The shelf life of guidance may decrease, structural uncertainty may increase and new equity considerations will emerge. As biomarker discovery accelerates and artificial intelligence-based technologies emerge, refinements to the methods and processes of evidence assessments will help to adapt and maintain the objective of investing in healthcare that is value for money. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 14 | 40% |
| Spain | 5 | 14% |
| Luxembourg | 2 | 6% |
| Nigeria | 1 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 23 | 66% |
| Scientists | 7 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 9% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 327 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 327 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 40 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 35 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 9% |
| Other | 15 | 5% |
| Other | 44 | 13% |
| Unknown | 137 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 21 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 18 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 4% |
| Engineering | 14 | 4% |
| Other | 73 | 22% |
| Unknown | 143 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 September 2022.
All research outputs
#1,169,555
of 25,353,525 outputs
Outputs from PharmacoEconomics
#41
of 1,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,546
of 333,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PharmacoEconomics
#4
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,353,525 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,994 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,922 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.