Promoting the systematic use of real-world data and real-world evidence for digital health technologies across Europe: a consensus framework.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Health Economics Policy and Law Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-14 DOI:10.1017/S1744133123000208
Divya Srivastava, Cornelia Henschke, Lotta Virtanen, Eno-Martin Lotman, Rocco Friebel, Vittoria Ardito, Francesco Petracca
{"title":"Promoting the systematic use of real-world data and real-world evidence for digital health technologies across Europe: a consensus framework.","authors":"Divya Srivastava,&nbsp;Cornelia Henschke,&nbsp;Lotta Virtanen,&nbsp;Eno-Martin Lotman,&nbsp;Rocco Friebel,&nbsp;Vittoria Ardito,&nbsp;Francesco Petracca","doi":"10.1017/S1744133123000208","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Despite the acceleration in the use of digital health technologies across different aspects of the healthcare system, the full potential of real-world data (RWD) and real-world evidence (RWE) arising from the technologies is not being utilised in decision-making. We examine current national efforts and future opportunities to systematically use RWD and RWE in decision-making in five countries (Estonia, Finland, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom), and then develop a framework for promotion of the systematic use of RWD and RWE. A review assesses current national efforts, complemented with a three-round consensus-building exercise among an international group of experts (<i>n</i>1 = 44, <i>n</i>2 = 24, <i>n</i>3 = 24) to derive key principles. We find that Estonia and Finland have invested and developed digital health-related policies for several years; Germany and Italy are the more recent arrivals, while the United Kingdom falls somewhere in the middle. Opportunities to promote the systematic use of RWD and RWE were identified for each country. Eight building blocks principles were agreed through consensus, relating to policy scope, institutional role and data collection. Promoting post-market surveillance and digital health technology vigilance ought to rely on clarity in scope and data collection with consensus reached on eight principles to leverage RWD and RWE.</p>","PeriodicalId":46836,"journal":{"name":"Health Economics Policy and Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Economics Policy and Law","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744133123000208","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Despite the acceleration in the use of digital health technologies across different aspects of the healthcare system, the full potential of real-world data (RWD) and real-world evidence (RWE) arising from the technologies is not being utilised in decision-making. We examine current national efforts and future opportunities to systematically use RWD and RWE in decision-making in five countries (Estonia, Finland, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom), and then develop a framework for promotion of the systematic use of RWD and RWE. A review assesses current national efforts, complemented with a three-round consensus-building exercise among an international group of experts (n1 = 44, n2 = 24, n3 = 24) to derive key principles. We find that Estonia and Finland have invested and developed digital health-related policies for several years; Germany and Italy are the more recent arrivals, while the United Kingdom falls somewhere in the middle. Opportunities to promote the systematic use of RWD and RWE were identified for each country. Eight building blocks principles were agreed through consensus, relating to policy scope, institutional role and data collection. Promoting post-market surveillance and digital health technology vigilance ought to rely on clarity in scope and data collection with consensus reached on eight principles to leverage RWD and RWE.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在整个欧洲促进数字健康技术对真实世界数据和真实世界证据的系统使用:一个共识框架。
尽管数字健康技术在医疗系统的不同方面的使用加速,但这些技术产生的真实世界数据(RWD)和真实世界证据(RWE)的全部潜力并没有被用于决策。我们研究了五个国家(爱沙尼亚、芬兰、德国、意大利和英国)在决策中系统使用RWD和RWE的当前国家努力和未来机会,然后制定了一个促进RWD和RWE系统使用的框架。一项审查评估了当前的国家努力,并辅以一个国际专家组(n1=44,n2=24,n3=24)进行的三轮建立共识活动,以得出关键原则。我们发现,爱沙尼亚和芬兰几年来一直在投资和制定数字健康相关政策;德国和意大利是最近抵达的国家,而英国则处于在中间。为每个国家确定了促进有系统地使用RWD和RWE的机会。通过协商一致商定了八项基本原则,涉及政策范围、机构作用和数据收集。促进上市后监测和数字健康技术警戒应依赖于范围和数据收集的明确性,并就利用RWD和RWE的八项原则达成共识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Economics Policy and Law
Health Economics Policy and Law HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
期刊介绍: International trends highlight the confluence of economics, politics and legal considerations in the health policy process. Health Economics, Policy and Law serves as a forum for scholarship on health policy issues from these perspectives, and is of use to academics, policy makers and health care managers and professionals. HEPL is international in scope, publishes both theoretical and applied work, and contains articles on all aspects of health policy. Considerable emphasis is placed on rigorous conceptual development and analysis, and on the presentation of empirical evidence that is relevant to the policy process.
期刊最新文献
Private equity involvement in primary care: the case of Ireland. Procedural fairness to recalibrate the power imbalance in health decision-making: comment on the report: 'Open and inclusive: Fair processes for financing universal health coverage'. Navigating conflicting expectations in addressing healthcare scarcity: a q-methodology study on the Dutch National Health Care Institute. Including carer health-related quality of life in NICE health technology assessments in the United Kingdom. The inefficient effects of non-clinical factors on health care costs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1