Academic Journal
Application of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) to Prioritize Real-World Evidence Studies for Health Technology Management: Outcomes and Lessons Learned by the Canadian Real-World Evidence for Value of Cancer Drugs (CanREValue) Collaboration
| Title: | Application of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) to Prioritize Real-World Evidence Studies for Health Technology Management: Outcomes and Lessons Learned by the Canadian Real-World Evidence for Value of Cancer Drugs (CanREValue) Collaboration |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Pam Takhar, Marc Geirnaert, Scott Gavura, Jaclyn Beca, Rebecca E. Mercer, Avram Denburg, Caroline Muñoz, Mina Tadrous, Ambica Parmar, Francois Dionne, Darryl Boehm, Carole Chambers, Erica Craig, Maureen Trudeau, Matthew C. Cheung, Joanne Houlihan, Valerie McDonald, Petros Pechlivanoglou, Marianne Taylor, Eric Wasylenko, Wiesława Dominika Wranik, Kelvin K. W. Chan |
| Source: | Current Oncology, Vol 31, Iss 4, Pp 1876-1898 (2024) |
| Publisher Information: | MDPI AG, 2024. |
| Publication Year: | 2024 |
| Collection: | LCC:Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens |
| Subject Terms: | oncology, decision-analysis, health technology assessment, multi-criteria decision analysis, Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens, RC254-282 |
| More Details: | Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is a value assessment tool designed to help support complex decision-making by incorporating multiple factors and perspectives in a transparent, structured approach. We developed an MCDA rating tool, consisting of seven criteria evaluating the importance and feasibility of conducting potential real-world evidence (RWE) studies aimed at addressing uncertainties stemming from initial cancer drug funding recommendations. In collaboration with the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health’s Provincial Advisory Group, a validation exercise was conducted to further evaluate the application of the rating tool using RWE proposals varying in complexity. Through this exercise, we aimed to gain insight into consensus building and deliberation processes and to identify efficiencies in the application of the rating tool. An experienced facilitator led a multidisciplinary committee, consisting of 11 Canadian experts, through consensus building, deliberation, and prioritization. A total of nine RWE proposals were evaluated and prioritized as low (n = 4), medium (n = 3), or high (n = 2) priority. Through an iterative process, efficiencies and recommendations to improve the rating tool and associated procedures were identified. The refined MCDA rating tool can help decision-makers prioritize important and feasible RWE studies for research and can enable the use of RWE for the life-cycle evaluation of cancer drugs. |
| Document Type: | article |
| File Description: | electronic resource |
| Language: | English |
| ISSN: | 1718-7729 1198-0052 |
| Relation: | https://www.mdpi.com/1718-7729/31/4/141; https://doaj.org/toc/1198-0052; https://doaj.org/toc/1718-7729 |
| DOI: | 10.3390/curroncol31040141 |
| Access URL: | https://doaj.org/article/8cbdb12baeaa4a1eacebc73b853c3a3f |
| Accession Number: | edsdoj.8cbdb12baeaa4a1eacebc73b853c3a3f |
| Database: | Directory of Open Access Journals |
| Full text is not displayed to guests. | Login for full access. |
| ISSN: | 17187729 11980052 |
|---|---|
| DOI: | 10.3390/curroncol31040141 |
| Published in: | Current Oncology |
| Language: | English |