儿童药品临床综合评价主题的遴选方法初探

中国药物评价 ›› 2021, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (3): 177-182.

所属专题：专栏——儿童药临床综合评价

• 专栏——儿童药临床综合议价 • 下一篇

儿童药品临床综合评价主题的遴选方法初探

邱英鹏1，赵琨1，王晓玲2，黄敏3，翟晓文4，贾露露2，赵瑞玲5，闫美兴6，
王刚7，孙华君3，陈育智8，刘克军1，尉耘翠2，曹旺2，赵羽西1，肖月1*

1. 国家卫生健康委卫生发展研究中心，北京 100044；
2. 国家儿童医学中心，首都医科大学附属北京儿童医院，北京 100045；
3. 上海市儿童医院，上海交通大学附属儿童医院，上海 200062；
4. 复旦大学附属儿科医院，上海 201102； 5. 山西省儿童医院，山西太原 030013； 6. 青岛市妇女儿童医院，山东青岛 266011； 7. 重庆医科大学附属儿童医院，重庆 400014； 8. 首都儿科研究所附属儿童医院北京 100020

收稿日期:2021-07-20 修回日期:2021-04-29 出版日期:2021-06-28 发布日期:2021-06-28

Exploration on Topic Selection Method for Evaluation of Pediatric Medicine in China

1. China National Health Development Research Center， Beijing 100044， China；
2. National Center for Children′s health， China； Beijing Children′s hospital， Capital Medical University， Beijing 100045 China；
3. Children′s hospital of Shanghai； Children′s Hospital of Shanghai Jiaotong University， Shanghai 200062， China；
4. Children′s Hospital of Fudan University， Shanghai 201102， China；
5. Children′s hospital of Shanxi， Shanxi Taiyuan 030013， China；
6. Qingdao Women and Children′s Hospital， Shandong Qingdao 266011， China；
7. Children′s Hospital of Chongqing Medical University， Chongqing 400014， China；
8. Children′s Hospital， Capital Institute of Pediatrics Beijing 100020， China

Received:2021-07-20 Revised:2021-04-29 Online:2021-06-28 Published:2021-06-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的：探索儿童药品临床综合评价主题遴选的路径和方法，为国家出台相关技术指南提供参考。方法：采用系统文献综述，总结国际卫生技术评估主题遴选经验。通过专家咨询，总结提炼主题遴选方法框架。联合6家试点医疗机构开展试点验证。结果：通过对17个卫生技术评估机构主题遴选经验总结，提出儿童药品临床综合评价主题遴选德的5大步骤即确定重点领域、收集主题、制定遴选标准、初步设计和证据收集，主题优先排序和决策。指导6家试点医疗机构完成6大重点疾病领域的主题遴选。结论：本研究提出的儿童药品临床综合评价主体遴选方法具有较好的科学性和操作性，但需在实践中不断完善。

关键词: font-size:13.3333px, ">儿童药品；药品临床综合评价；主题遴选

Abstract: Objective： To explore the topic selection method for evaluation of pediatric medicine(EPM) and inform the development of national technical guideline of EPM. Methods： A systematic review was conducted to summarize practices on topic selection in health technology assessment(HTA) agency around the world. Then， a methodical framework of topic selection of EPM were produced by expert consultation and pilots on were implemented by 6 hospitals. Results： A methodical framework with 5 major steps were proposed based on common practices summarized from 17 HTA agencies， which were priority setting on disease area， collection of potential topics， primary design of topic and evidence collection， ranking and decision making. under the guidance of the frameworks. within six prioritized areas， six topics were selected by 6 hospitals respectively. Conclusion： The scientificity and operability of the framework of EPM were shown to be satisfactory in the pilots， while it needs to be further improved in future practices.

Key words: font-size:13.3333px, ">Pediatric medicine； Evaluation； Topic selection

中图分类号:

邱英鹏, 赵琨, 王晓玲, 黄敏, 翟晓文, 贾露露, 赵瑞玲, 闫美兴, 王刚, 孙华君, 陈育智, 刘克军, 尉耘翠, 曹旺, 赵羽西, 肖月. 儿童药品临床综合评价主题的遴选方法初探[J]. 中国药物评价, 2021, 38(3): 177-182.

参考文献

[1]Frazao TDC， Camilo DGG， Cabral ELS & Souza RP. Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) in health care： a systematic review of the main characteristics and methodological steps[J]. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak， 2018， 18：90.
     [2]Husereau D， Boucher M & Noorani H. Priority setting for health technology assessment at CADTH[J]. Int J Technol Assess Health Care， 2010， 26：341-347.
     [3]Health CAfDaTi. Topic Identification and Prioritization Process[EB/OL]. [2019-02-14]. https：//www.cadth.ca/.
     [4]Campbell B， Morris R， Mandava L， et al. Identifying and selecting new procedures for health technology assessment： a decade of nice experience in the United Kingdom[J]. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2014， 30： 454-460.
     [5]Excellence NIfHac (2018) Topic selection[EB/OL]. [2019-02-15]. https：//www.nice.org.uk/about/what-we-do/our-programmes/topic-selection#ta-selection.
     [6]Youngkong S， Baltussen R， Tantivess S， et al. Multicriteria decision analysis for including health interventions in the universal health coverage benefit package in Thailand[J]. Value Health， 2012， 15：961-970.
     [7]Program HIaTA (2012) Health Technology Assessment Process Guidelines[EB/OL]. [2019-02-15]. http：//www.hitap.net/en/documents/18966.
     [8]Oortwijn WJ， Vondeling H， Van Barneveld T， et al. Priority setting for health technology assessment in The Netherlands： Principles and practice[J].Health Policy， 2002， 62：227-242.
     [9]Development TNOfHRa (2012) Summary of assessment procedure[EB/OL].[2019-02-16]. https：//www.zonmw.nl/fileadmin/zonmw/documenten/Corporate/Engelse_website/ZonMw_summary_assessment_procedure.pdf.
     [10]Carlsson P. Health technology assessment and priority setting for health policy in Sweden[J]. Int J Technol Assess Health Care， 2004， 20：44-54.
     [11]Services SAfHTAaAoS (2018) Assessment of method in health care[EB/OL]. [2019-02-16]. https：//www.sbu.se/contentassets/76adf07e270c48efaf67e3b560b7c59c/eng_metodboken.pdf.
     [12]Jankauskiene D， Petronyte G. A model for HTA priority setting： experience in Lithuania[J]. Int J Technol Assess Health Care， 2013， 29：450-455.
     [13]Care TIfQaEiH (2017) General method(version 5.0) [EB/OL]. [2019-02-17]. https：//www.iqwig.de/en/methods/methods-paper.3020.html.
     [14]Kosherbayeva L， Hailey D， Kurakbaev K， et al. A process of prioritizing topics for health technology assessment in kazakhstan[J]. Int J Technol Assess Health Care， 2016， 32：147-151.
     [15]Shani S， Siebzehner MI， Luxenburg O， et al. Setting priorities for the adoption of health technologies on a national level-the Israeli experience[J]. Health Policy， 2000， 54：169-85.
     [16]Review IfCaE (2018) Guide to understanding health technology assessment(HTA) [EB/OL]. [2019-02-17]. http：//icer-review.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/ICER-Guide-to-Understanding-Health-Technology-Assessment-6.19.18.pdf.
     [17]Wales HT (2019) Our appraisal process[EB/OL]. [2019-02-17]. http：//www.healthtechnology.wales/about/our-appraisal-process/.
     [18]Autority HIaQ (2016) A guide to health technology assessment at HIQA[EB/OL]. [2019-02-17]. https：//www.hiqa.ie/sites/default/files/2017-01/A-Guide-to-Health-Technology-Assessment.pdf.
     [19]Ontario HQ (2018) Health technology assessment： process and method guide[EB/OL]. [2019-02-16]. https：//www.hqontario.ca/Portals/0/documents/evidence/reports/hta-methods-and-process-guide-en.pdf.
     [20]Centre BHCK (2019) Topic selection for the annual programme [EB/OL]. [2019-02-17]. https：//kce.fgov.be/en/topic-selection-for-the-annual-programme.
     [21]Effectiveness AfC (2018) Medical technology evaluation methods and process guide[EB/OL].[2019-02-18].http：//www.ace-hta.gov.sg/public-data/our-process-and-methods/ACE%20methods%20and%20process%20guide%20for%20drug%20evaluation%20(5%20Feb%202018).pdf.
     [22]Section TMHTA (2018) Health technology assessment mannual[EB/OL]. [2019-02-18]. http：//www.moh.gov.my/penerbitan/mymahtas/HTA_MANUAL_MAHTAS.pdf.
     [23]Quality TAfHRa (2019) EHC program topic nomination and selection[EB/OL]. [2019-02-16]. https：//effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/about/epc/nomination/
     [24]Sibbald SL， Singer PA， Upshur R， et al. Priority setting： what constitutes success? A conceptual framework for successful priority setting[J]. BMC health services research， 2009， 9：43.

儿童药品临床综合评价主题的遴选方法初探

Exploration on Topic Selection Method for Evaluation of Pediatric Medicine in China

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	李川, 杨军令, 程晨, 贾伟伟. 中药新药的药代研究[J]. 中国药物评价, 2023, 40(6): 457-459.
[2]	叶潇, 郑爽#, 林超, 黄舒佳, 王宇, 于敏, 刘颖. 生物分析方法验证及生物样品分析各指导原则间的比较[J]. 中国药物评价, 2023, 40(6): 470-479.
[3]	李丽, 刘婉如, 张征, 江志杰, 李宁. 逐瘀通脉胶囊对大鼠急性局灶性脑缺血再灌注损伤的影响[J]. 中国药物评价, 2023, 40(6): 502-505.
[4]	颜若曦. 《PIC/S生物技术检查备忘录》分析与探讨[J]. 中国药物评价, 2023, 40(6): 537-540.
[5]	甘加明, 邹瑜, 黄丹, 陈冬华, 严全鸿. 基于流池法的氨糖美辛肠溶片体外溶出行为研究[J]. 中国药物评价, 2023, 40(6): 480-484.
[6]	徐桂连, 董斌, 韩春晖, 郝爱鱼. 磷酸苯丙哌林多晶型制备、表征及平衡溶解度研究[J]. 中国药物评价, 2023, 40(6): 489-493.
[7]	代琪, 李康曦, 叶俏波, 文永盛, 许莉, 李及. 僵蚕化学成分、药理作用及毒理学研究进展[J]. 中国药物评价, 2023, 40(5): 402-408.
[8]	赵磊, 杨铭, 王皓, 马彧, 马金刚, 姜大成, 王路宏, 昝珂. 沙棘不同采收期与不同干燥过程真菌毒素的考察及其风险评估[J]. 中国药物评价, 2023, 40(5): 377-383.
[9]	洪淑华, 林琪珊, 柴将红, 潘红炬. 佐匹克隆有关物质及其校正因子影响因素的测定研究[J]. 中国药物评价, 2023, 40(5): 384-388.
[10]	李悦忱, 崔韶婧, 赵月然. 高效液相色谱-柱后光化学衍生法测定活血止痛胶囊中黄曲霉毒素的含量[J]. 中国药物评价, 2023, 40(5): 390-395.
[11]	田洁, 郝爱鱼, 鹿麟, 邹翩, 董斌. 几种药物配伍对常见塑料包装输液产品中不溶性微粒的影响研究[J]. 中国药物评价, 2023, 40(5): 396-401.
[12]	杨艳青, 陈春梅, 陈伟, 吴瑞, 王学昌, 段莲. 信迪利单抗一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的快速卫生技术评估[J]. 中国药物评价, 2023, 40(5): 409-415.
[13]	江依帆, 陈丽萍, 张若钰, 巫培豪, 邱嘉珉, 宣建伟, 毕惠嫦. 抑酸药物的临床综合评价指标体系构建[J]. 中国药物评价, 2023, 40(5): 416-421.
[14]	华敏凡, 宋沧桑, 李兴德, 陆维, 毛盼盼, 王国徽. 服药依从性预测模型临床应用研究进展[J]. 中国药物评价, 2023, 40(5): 422-425.
[15]	黄波, 曹晓明. 等渗与低渗造影剂对老年肾功能损伤患者行冠脉造影术的安全性临床观察[J]. 中国药物评价, 2023, 40(5): 426-429.