卫生技术创新政策优先事项设定模型

J. Sharma, J. Bunders, T. Zuiderent-Jerak, B. Regeer
{"title":"卫生技术创新政策优先事项设定模型","authors":"J. Sharma, J. Bunders, T. Zuiderent-Jerak, B. Regeer","doi":"10.31354/GLOBALCE.V2I3.84","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Health Technology Assessment focuses on equal appraisal of health technologies introduced into the market. This has made regulators and the governance of innovation reactive and dependent on the initiatives innovators take for technology development, thus making it supply driven. The policy makers’ role has become one of appraising technologies that are already developed rather than guiding the development agenda. This severely limits the possibility to ensure that health technologies sufficiently address major issues such as burden of disease, trade deficit and health inequalities. It places governments outside of the actor arena that co-shapes technologies in the early stages, restricting the involvement to facilitating scale up or not. It makes it hard to achieve health technology governance practices that maximally contribute to ensure technological developments that actually address public concerns. What is the potential of frameworks for changing this dynamics and how can evidence shape technology development agenda’s without falling into the traps of regulator lock-in or social engineering? The methodology presented in this study takes first but important steps towards an evidence based framework for priority setting to guide innovations, particularly in health and social sectors","PeriodicalId":318587,"journal":{"name":"Global Clinical Engineering Journal","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Model for Priority Setting in Health Technology Innovation Policy\",\"authors\":\"J. Sharma, J. Bunders, T. Zuiderent-Jerak, B. Regeer\",\"doi\":\"10.31354/GLOBALCE.V2I3.84\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Health Technology Assessment focuses on equal appraisal of health technologies introduced into the market. This has made regulators and the governance of innovation reactive and dependent on the initiatives innovators take for technology development, thus making it supply driven. The policy makers’ role has become one of appraising technologies that are already developed rather than guiding the development agenda. This severely limits the possibility to ensure that health technologies sufficiently address major issues such as burden of disease, trade deficit and health inequalities. It places governments outside of the actor arena that co-shapes technologies in the early stages, restricting the involvement to facilitating scale up or not. It makes it hard to achieve health technology governance practices that maximally contribute to ensure technological developments that actually address public concerns. What is the potential of frameworks for changing this dynamics and how can evidence shape technology development agenda’s without falling into the traps of regulator lock-in or social engineering? The methodology presented in this study takes first but important steps towards an evidence based framework for priority setting to guide innovations, particularly in health and social sectors\",\"PeriodicalId\":318587,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Clinical Engineering Journal\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Clinical Engineering Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31354/GLOBALCE.V2I3.84\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Clinical Engineering Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31354/GLOBALCE.V2I3.84","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

卫生技术评估侧重于对引进市场的卫生技术进行平等评价。这使得监管机构和创新治理被动地依赖于创新者为技术发展所采取的主动行动,从而使其成为供应驱动型。决策者的作用已经变成了评价已经开发出来的技术,而不是指导发展议程。这严重限制了确保卫生技术充分解决诸如疾病负担、贸易逆差和卫生不平等等重大问题的可能性。它将政府排除在早期共同塑造技术的角色之外,限制了政府的参与,以促进规模扩大或不扩大。这使得难以实现卫生技术治理实践,这些实践最大限度地有助于确保技术发展实际解决公众关注的问题。改变这种动态的框架的潜力是什么?证据如何在不落入监管者锁定或社会工程陷阱的情况下塑造技术发展议程?本研究提出的方法迈出了重要的第一步,朝着建立以证据为基础的框架,确定优先事项,以指导创新,特别是在卫生和社会部门
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A Model for Priority Setting in Health Technology Innovation Policy
Health Technology Assessment focuses on equal appraisal of health technologies introduced into the market. This has made regulators and the governance of innovation reactive and dependent on the initiatives innovators take for technology development, thus making it supply driven. The policy makers’ role has become one of appraising technologies that are already developed rather than guiding the development agenda. This severely limits the possibility to ensure that health technologies sufficiently address major issues such as burden of disease, trade deficit and health inequalities. It places governments outside of the actor arena that co-shapes technologies in the early stages, restricting the involvement to facilitating scale up or not. It makes it hard to achieve health technology governance practices that maximally contribute to ensure technological developments that actually address public concerns. What is the potential of frameworks for changing this dynamics and how can evidence shape technology development agenda’s without falling into the traps of regulator lock-in or social engineering? The methodology presented in this study takes first but important steps towards an evidence based framework for priority setting to guide innovations, particularly in health and social sectors
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Healthcare Providers’ Readiness to Address Medical Device Cybersecurity within the Irish Healthcare System Sustainable procurement of medical devices in an international context - Part 3 A Landscape Study to Determine the Innovation Mortality Rate in Health Technology Innovations Across the Globe Sustainable procurement of medical devices in an international context - Part 2 Application of statistical processes control for the performance improvement of a clinical engineering department
×
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