"It all depends": conceptualizing public involvement in the context of health technology assessment agencies.

There have been calls in recent years for greater public involvement in health technology assessment (HTA). Yet the concept of public involvement is poorly articulated and little attention has been paid to the context of HTA agencies. This article investigates how public involvement is conceptualized in the HTA agency environment. Using qualitative concept analysis methods, we reviewed the HTA literature and the websites of HTA agencies and conducted semi-structured interviews with informants in Canada, Denmark, and the United Kingdom. Our analysis reveals that HTA agencies' role as bridges or boundary organizations situated at the frontier of research and policymaking causes the agencies to struggle with the idea of public involvement. The HTA community is concerned with conceptualizing public involvement in such a way as to meet scientific and methodological standards without neglecting its responsibilities to healthcare policymakers. We offer a conceptual tool for analyzing the nature of public involvement across agencies, characterizing different domains, levels of involvement, and types of publics.

[1]  G. Rowe,et al.  Evaluating Public-Participation Exercises: A Research Agenda , 2004 .

[2]  V. Entwistle,et al.  Developing Information Materials to Present the Findings of Technology Assessments to Consumers: The Experience of the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination , 1998, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[3]  Maria Olejaz,et al.  Denmark health system review. , 2012, Health systems in transition.

[4]  C. Charles,et al.  Lay participation in health care decision making: a conceptual framework. , 1993, Journal of health politics, policy and law.

[5]  J. Vang The Consensus Development Conference and the European Experience , 1986, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[6]  H. Have Ethical perspectives on health technology assessment. , 2004 .

[7]  R. Battista,et al.  Health technology assessment in Canada , 2009, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[8]  E. Hansen Technology Assessment in a User Perspective-Experiences with Drug Technology , 1992, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[9]  J. Pivik,et al.  A consumer involvement model for health technology assessment in Canada. , 2004, Health policy.

[10]  D. Banta The development of health technology assessment. , 2003, Health policy.

[11]  J. Morse Exploring the theoretical basis of nursing using advanced techniques of concept analysis , 1995, ANS. Advances in nursing science.

[12]  Glyn Davis,et al.  Mapping Public Participation in Policy Choices , 2002 .

[13]  Risto P Roine,et al.  Health technology assessment in Finland , 2009, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[14]  J. Dixon,et al.  Public involvement in health care , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[15]  B. N. Ong The Lay Perspective in Health Technology Assessment , 1996, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[16]  Jenny Donovan,et al.  'The public is too subjective': public involvement at different levels of health-care decision making. , 2002, Social science & medicine.

[17]  M. Patton Qualitative research and evaluation methods , 1980 .

[18]  H. Bastian,et al.  Speaking Up for Ourselves: The Evolution of Consumer Advocacy in Health Care , 1998, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[19]  D. Menon,et al.  The Development of a Health Technology Assessment Program: The Case of Alberta , 1995, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[20]  M. Wetherell,et al.  Opening the box: evaluating the Citizens Council of NICE: report prepared for the National Co-ordinating Centre for Research Methodology, NHS Research and Development Programme , 2005 .

[21]  Bryn Williams-Jones,et al.  Mapping the integration of social and ethical issues in health technology assessment , 2007, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[22]  J. Abelson,et al.  Engaging Citizens: One Route to Health Care Accountability , 2004 .

[23]  D. Guston Boundary Organizations in Environmental Policy and Science: An Introduction , 2001 .

[24]  D. McDaid Co-ordinating health technology assessment in Canada: a European perspective. , 2003, Health policy.

[25]  L. Bonneux,et al.  Balancing evidence and public opinion in health technology assessments: The case of leukoreduction , 2006, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[26]  Simon Joss,et al.  Public participation in science : the role of consensus conferences in Europe , 1995 .

[27]  D. Hailey,et al.  Consumer Involvement in Health Technology Assessment , 2005 .

[28]  A. Coulter Perspectives on health technology assessment: response from the patient's perspective , 2004, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[29]  Janice M Morse,et al.  Constructing Qualitatively Derived Theory: Concept Construction and Concept Typologies , 2004, Qualitative health research.

[30]  J. Tritter,et al.  The snakes and ladders of user involvement: Moving beyond Arnstein. , 2006, Health policy.

[31]  A. Hvenegaard,et al.  HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN DENMARK , 2000, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[32]  Michael Drummond,et al.  Health technology assessment in the United Kingdom , 2009, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[33]  G. Sartori Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics , 1970, American Political Science Review.

[34]  J. Sisk Introduction to Measuring Health Care Effectiveness , 1990, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[35]  M. Calnan,et al.  The Patient's Perspective , 1998, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[36]  Mita Giacomini,et al.  Bringing 'the public' into health technology assessment and coverage policy decisions: from principles to practice. , 2007, Health policy.

[37]  David Hailey,et al.  Survey on the involvement of consumers in health technology assessment programs , 2006, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[38]  Joanna Goven Assessing genetic testing: who are the "lay experts"? , 2008, Health policy.

[39]  John F P Bridges,et al.  Patient-based health technology assessment: A vision of the future , 2007, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[40]  P. Lehoux The problem of health technology : policy implications for modern health care systems , 2006 .

[41]  A. Braunack-Mayer Ethics and health technology assessment: Handmaiden and/or critic? , 2006, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[42]  S. Oliver,et al.  Involving consumers in a needs‐led research programme: a pilot project , 2001, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[43]  E. Nolte,et al.  Public involvement policies in health: exploring their conceptual basis , 2006, Health Economics, Policy and Law.

[45]  J. Newman,et al.  Discursive Arenas: Deliberation and the Constitution of Identity in Public Participation at a Local Level , 2006 .

[46]  S. Oliver,et al.  Consumer involvement in the health technology assessment program , 2004, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[47]  P. Andreasen Consensus Conferences in Different Countries , 1988, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[48]  P. Cleary Satisfaction May Not Suffice!: A Commentary on ‘a Patient's Perspective’ , 1998, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[49]  R N Battista,et al.  The evolving paradigm of health technology assessment: reflections for the millennium. , 1999, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[50]  A. Culyer Involving stakeholders in healthcare decisions--the experience of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) in England and Wales. , 2005, Healthcare quarterly.