Skip to main content

Expert Elicitation to Inform Health Technology Assessment

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Elicitation

Part of the book series: International Series in Operations Research & Management Science ((ISOR,volume 261))

Abstract

In the face of constrained budgets, unavoidable decisions about the use of health care interventions have to be made. Decision makers seeking to maximise health for their given budget should use the best available information on effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, and for this purpose they may use a process of gathering and combining existing evidence in this context called Health Technology Assessment (HTA). In informing decisions, utilising HTA, expert elicitation can provide valuable information, particularly where evidence is missing, where it may not be as well developed (e.g. diagnostics, medical devices, early access to medicines scheme or public health) or limited (insufficient, not very relevant, contradictory and/or flawed). Here, formal methods to elicit expert judgements are preferred to improve the accountability and transparency of the decision making process, in addition to the important role in reducing bias and the use of heuristics. There have been a limited number of applications of expert elicitation in health care decision making, and in part this may be due to a number of methodological uncertainties regarding the applicability and transferability of techniques from other disciples, such as Bayesian statistics and engineering, to health care. This chapter discusses the distinguishing features of health care decision making and the use of expert elicitation to inform this, drawing on applied examples in the area illustrating some of the complexities and uncertainties.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Babuscia A, Cheung KM (2014) An approach to perform expert elicitation for engineering design risk analysis: methodology and experimental results. J R Stat Soc 177(2):475–497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briggs AH (1999) A Bayesian approach to stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ 8(3):257–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryan S, Williams I, McIver S (2007) Seeing the NICE side of cost-effectiveness analysis: a qualitative investigation of the use of CEA in NICE technology appraisals. Health Econ 16(2):179–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claxton K (1999) The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. J Health Econ 18(3):341–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke RM (1991) Experts in Uncertainty. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Culyer AJ, Wagstaff A (1993) Equity and equality in health and health care. J Health Econ 12:431–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drummond M, Sculpher MJ, Torrance JW, O’Brien BJ, Stoddart GL (2005) Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • European Food Safety Authority (2014) Guidance on expert knowledge elicitation in food and feed safety risk assessment. EFSA J 12(6):3734. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3734/epdf

  • Expert Judgement Network (2016) Selection of structured expert judgement software. http://www.expertsinuncertainty.net/Software/tabid/4149/Default.aspx. Accessed 05 June 2017

  • Folland S, Goodman AC, Stano M (2013) The economics of health and healthcare, 7th edn. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer G, Hoffrage U (1995) How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: frequency formats. Psychol Rev 102(4):684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gosling JP (2014) Methods for eliciting expert opinion to inform health technology assessment. Medical Research Council. https://www.mrc.ac.uk/documents/pdf/methods-for-eliciting-expert-opinion-gosling-2014/. Accessed 05 June 2017

  • Gosling JP (2018) SHELF: the Sheffield elicitation framework. In: Dias LC, Morton A, Quigley J (eds) Elicitation: the science and art of structuring judgment. Springer, New York. (Chapter 4 in this book)

  • Griffin S, Claxton K, Palmer SJ, Sculpher MJ (2011) Dangerous omissions: the consequences of ignoring decision uncertainty. Health Econ 20(2):212–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grigore B, Peters J, Hyde C, Stein K (2016) A comparison of two methods for expert elicitation in health technology assessments. BMC Med Res Methodol 16:85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grigore B, Peters J, Hyde C, Stein K (2013) Methods to elicit probability distributions from experts: a systematic review of reported practice in health technology assessment. PharmacoEconomics 31(11):991–1003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haakma W, Steuten LM, Bojke L, IJzerman MJ (2014) Belief elicitation to populate health economic models of medical diagnostic devices in development. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 12(3):327–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iglesias CPTA, Rogowski WH, Payne K (2016) Reporting guidelines for the use of expert judgement in model-based economic evaluations. PharmacoEconomics 34(11):1161–1172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris DE, Oakley JE, Crowe JA (2014) A web-based tool for eliciting probability distributions from experts. Environ Model Softw 52:1–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Hagan A, Buck CE, Daneshkhah A, Eiser JR, Garthwaite PH, David J, Jenkinson DJ, Oakley JE, Rakow T (2006) Uncertain judgements: eliciting experts’ probabilities. Wiley, Chichester

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Romanow RJQ (2002) Building on values: the future of health care in Canada, Final Report

    Google Scholar 

  • Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Drummond M, Mccabe C (2006) Whither trial-based economic evaluation for health care decision making? Health Econ 15(7):677–687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soares MO, Bojke L, Dumville J, Iglesias C, Cullum N, Claxton K (2011) Methods to elicit experts’ beliefs over uncertain quantities: application to a cost effectiveness transition model of negative pressure wound therapy for severe pressure ulceration. Stat Med 30(19):2363–2380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soares MODJ, Ashby R, Iglesias C, Bojke L, Adderley U (2013) Methods to assess cost effectiveness and value of further research when data are sparse: negative pressure wound therapy for severe pressure ulcers. Med Decis Mak 33(3):415–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soares MO, Dumville JC, Ades AE, Welton NJ (2014) Treatment comparisons for decision making: facing the problems of sparse and few data. J R Stat Soc 177(1):259–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan W, Payne K (2011) The appropriate elicitation of expert opinion in economic models. PharmacoEconomics 29(6):455–459

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marta O. Soares .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Soares, M.O., Bojke, L. (2018). Expert Elicitation to Inform Health Technology Assessment. In: Dias, L., Morton, A., Quigley, J. (eds) Elicitation. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 261. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65052-4_18

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics