A Delphi Study to Establish National Cost-Effectiveness Research Priorities for Positron Emission Tomography
For which topic were research priorities identified?
cost-effectiveness of positron emission tomography (PET)
In which location was the research priority setting conducted?
Europe - United Kingdom
Why was it conducted at all?
The need to evaluate innovative health care technologies such as positron emission tomography (PET) is widely recognised. However, there are only limited re sources for research and development funding and it will only ever be practical to subject a limited number of health care technologies to experimental evaluation. The Standing Group on Health Technology (SGHT) is responsible each year for prioritising and commission ing cost-effectiveness research into important health technologies in the UK.
What was the objective?
to determine the key cost-effectiveness research questions relating to positron emission tomography (PET) in the UK
What was the outcome?
a ranking list of 10 research topics
How long did the research prioritization take?
No information provided.
Which methods were used to identify research priorities?
How were the priorities for research identified exactly?
Step 1: systematic literature review to establish existing knowledge base. Step 2: Delphi round 1: participants were asked to suggest three research priorities for PET, 27 research priorities suggested. Step 3: Delphi round 2: participants were asked to rate each topic. Step 4: Delphi round 3: participants were asked to rank top five research priorities
Which stakeholders took part?
Experts from radiology, medical physics, suppliers of equipment, nuclear medicine, oncology, hospital medical directors, neuropsychiatry, health economists with an interest in pet, public health medicine, cardiology and radiopharmacy. Delphi round 1: 20 participants. Delphi round 2: 22 participants. Delphi round 3: 16 participants.
How were stakeholders recruited?
Participants in the Delphi study were selected by discussion with five individuals with an interest in, and awareness of, developments in PET in the UK.
Were stakeholders actively involved or did they just participate?
Stakeholders were mere participants of the research prioritization process; they were not actively involved in the process.