Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T15:06:15.218Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Guidelines for the Clinical and Economic Assessment of Health Technologies

The Case of Magnetic Resonance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Gordon Guyatt  and
Michael Drummond
Gordon Guyatt
Affiliation:
Departments of Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics McMaster Health Sciences Centre Hamilton
Michael Drummond
Affiliation:
Health Services Management CentreUniversity of Birmingham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

That new health technologies often diffuse into the health care systems of developed countries without adequate evaluation has long been a cause of concern (I). In addition, where clinical or economic assessments have been carried out, they often contain methodological weaknesses which reduce their usefulness to health policy makers or clinical practitioners (5,6).

Type
An International View of Magnetic Resonance—Imaging and Spectroscopy
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 1 , Issue 3 , July 1985 , pp. 551 - 566
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Banta, H. D., Behney, C. J., & Willems, J. S.Toward rational technology in medicine. New York: Springer, 1981.Google ScholarPubMed
2.Brant-Zawadzki, M., Davis, P. L., Crooks, L. E. et al. , NMR demonstration of cerebral abnormalities: Comparison with CT. American Journal of Radiology, 1983, 140, 847–54.Google ScholarPubMed
3.Cockshott, W. P., Jenkins, J. K., & Pui, M.Limiting the use of routine radiography for acute ankle injuries. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 1983, 129, 129–131.Google ScholarPubMed
4.Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster Health Sciences Centre. Interpretation of diagnostic data, (Parts 1–6). Canadian Medical Association Journal, 1983, 129. (This series of six articles appeared in the following issues of the Journal: September 1, September 15, October 1, October 15, November 1, November 15.)Google Scholar
5.Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster Health Sciences Centre. How to read clinical journals: V—To distinguish useful from useless or even harmful therapy. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 1981, 124, 1156–62.Google Scholar
6.Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster Health Sciences Centre. How to read clinical journals: VII—To understand an economic evaluation (Part A). Canadian Medical Association Journal, 1984, 130, 1428–34.Google Scholar
7.Drummond, M. F.Principles of economic appraisal in health care. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications, 1980.Google Scholar
8.Drummond, M. F., & Stoddart, G. L.Economic analysis and clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials, 1984, 5, 115–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Feeny, D., Guyatt, G., & Tugwell, P. (eds.). Health care technology: Effectiveness, efficiency and public policy. Halifax, Nova Scotia: Institute for Research on Public Policy, in press.Google Scholar
10.Finkler, S. A.Cost-effectiveness of regionalisation—further results for heart surgery. Health Services Research, 1981, 16 (3), 325–33.Google ScholarPubMed
11.Guyatt, G. H., Tugwell, P. X., Feeny, D., Haynes, R. B., & Drummond, M.The role of before-after studies of therapeutic impact in the assessment of diagnostic technologies. Journal of Chronic Diseases, in press.Google Scholar
12.Hull, R., Hirsh, J., Sackett, D. L., & Stoddart, G. L.Cost effectiveness of clinical diagnosis, venography and non-invasive testing in patients with symptomatic deepvein thrombosis. New England Journal of Medicine, 1981, 304, 1561–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Hull, R. et al. (1983) Pulmonary angiography, ventilation lung scanning, and venography for clinically suspected pulmonary embolism with abnoral perfusion lung scan. Annals of Internal Medicine, 1983, 98 (6), 891–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Jennett, B.High technology medicine: Benefits and burdens. London: Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust, 1984.Google Scholar
15.Larson, E. B., Omenn, G. S., & Lewis, H.Diagnostic evaluation of headache: Impact of computerized tomography and cost-effectiveness. Journal of the American Medical Association, 1980, 243 (4), 359–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.McNeil, B. J., Keeler, E., & Adelstein, S. J.Primer on certain elements of medical decision making. New England Journal of Medicine, 1975, 293, 211–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.McNeil, B. J., Hanley, J., Funkenstein, H. H., & Rumbaughm, C.Utilisation of computed tomography of the head in a tertiary care hospital. Radiology, 1981, 139, 113–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Tugwell, P., Feeny, D., Guyatt, G., & Haynes, R. B.A framework for the evaluation of technology: The technology assessment iterative loop (TAIL). Journal of Chronic Diseases, in press.Google Scholar