Mixed-methods evaluation of health technology assessments shows quality variability in India, indicating improvements are needed for effective policy translation.
This study aims to evaluate the technical quality of health technology assessment (HTA) studies conducted in India. Second, we aim to identify process-related challenges across the life cycle of an HTA from commissioning to policy translation. A mixed-methods approach was employed to assess HTA studies conducted between 2018 and 2023 conducted by ten regional resource centers. The quantitative assessment involved reviewing 26 HTA reports using the Indian HTA Quality Appraisal Checklist. The qualitative component included semi-structured interviews with staff from six regional resource centers and the Health Technology Assessment in India secretariat to explore the processes of topic selection, study conduct, stakeholder engagement, and evidence to policy translation. Quantitative data were analyzed through scoring and categorization into quality ratings, while qualitative data were analyzed thematically using the framework method. In the quantitative assessment, 14% (n = 3) of studies were found to be of excellent quality, 50% (n = 11) were deemed to be of good quality, 32% (n = 7) were of average quality, and only one (4%) of poor quality. The qualitative findings highlighted limited adherence to guidelines, challenges in framing the topic, and gaps in technical expertise for advanced analyses. Additionally, a high staff turnover, the need for better stakeholder consultations, and strategies to disseminate the evidence were also highlighted. These findings emphasize the need for improvements in adherence to guidelines, transparency in topic selection, and alignment of HTA findings with policy needs. Investments in training, advanced methodology guidance, and systematic communication between researchers and policy makers are crucial to enhancing HTA's impact in India.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chugh et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: