Reducing normative bias in health technology assessment: interactive evaluation and casuistry

Area of Science:

• Health Technology Assessment (HTA)
• Medical Ethics
• Sociology of Technology

Background:

• Traditional Health Technology Assessment (HTA) often suffers from bias due to the neglect of relevant stakeholder perspectives.
• Current ethical approaches in technology assessment frequently rely on abstract principles, leading to confusion in specific case evaluations.

Purpose of the Study:

• To propose Interactive Technology Assessment (iTA) as a method to incorporate diverse perspectives into HTA.
• To establish a procedural ethics framework within iTA for addressing value clashes in technology assessment.
• To explore the utility of casuistry within iTA for clarifying issues and facilitating consensus-building.

Main Methods:

• The study advocates for iTA as a procedural approach to HTA.
• It suggests focusing on achieving agreement on relevant, plausible, and feasible research questions.
• Casuistry is proposed as a key tool within iTA to articulate and clarify specific value-related issues.

Main Results:

• iTA can establish a procedural ethics framework, moving beyond the limitations of principle-based ethics in technology assessment.
• The use of casuistry within iTA aids in articulating the core issues of specific cases.
• This approach facilitates explication and consensus-building among stakeholders.

Conclusions:

• Interactive Technology Assessment (iTA) provides a viable framework to mitigate bias in HTA by including multiple perspectives.
• Procedural ethics, facilitated by casuistry within iTA, offers a more effective way to handle value conflicts than traditional ethical principles.
• iTA promotes clearer understanding and consensus in the evaluation of health technologies.