Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2014 Apr;32(4):345-65.
doi: 10.1007/s40273-014-0135-0.

Assessing the value of healthcare interventions using multi-criteria decision analysis: a review of the literature

Affiliations
Review

Assessing the value of healthcare interventions using multi-criteria decision analysis: a review of the literature

Kevin Marsh et al. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014 Apr.

Abstract

The objective of this study is to support those undertaking a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) by reviewing the approaches adopted in healthcare MCDAs to date, how these varied with the objective of the study, and the lessons learned from this experience. Searches of EMBASE and MEDLINE identified 40 studies that provided 41 examples of MCDA in healthcare. Data were extracted on the objective of the study, methods employed, and decision makers' and study authors' reflections on the advantages and disadvantages of the methods. The recent interest in MCDA in healthcare is mirrored in an increase in the application of MCDA to evaluate healthcare interventions. Of the studies identified, the first was published in 1990, but more than half were published since 2011. They were undertaken in 18 different countries, and were designed to support investment (coverage and reimbursement), authorization, prescription, and research funding allocation decisions. Many intervention types were assessed: pharmaceuticals, public health interventions, screening, surgical interventions, and devices. Most used the value measurement approach and scored performance using predefined scales. Beyond these similarities, a diversity of different approaches were adopted, with only limited correspondence between the approach and the type of decision or product. Decision makers consulted as part of these studies, as well as the authors of the studies are positive about the potential of MCDA to improve decision making. Further work is required, however, to develop guidance for those undertaking MCDA.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Med Decis Making. 2002 Mar-Apr;22(2):125-39 - PubMed
    1. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2007 Apr;12(2):80-5 - PubMed
    1. J Clin Pharmacol. 2013 May;53(5):475-82 - PubMed
    1. Health Expect. 2005 Dec;8(4):334-44 - PubMed
    1. Health Econ. 2006 Jul;15(7):689-96 - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources