Project #15415 - Project proposal

Choose ONE of the following health care technologies. 

·         HPV vaccination for adolescent boys

·         Liquid based cytology for cervical screening

 

·         Population based colorectal cancer screening

Your task is to prepare a briefing paper to advise the Minister for Health whether the technology should be funded in the Australian health system. 

Research your chosen technology and find 2-3 academic papers/reports which present cost-effectiveness analyses of your chosen technology.   Undertake a critical appraisal of the papers and prepare a report that includes key information about the technology and your recommendation about whether the technology should be funded in the Australian setting. 

In undertaking your research for published papers you should look for Australian economic evaluations first and only include international studies if there are no published Australian studies.   

Note that for each of these technologies there may be technology assessment reports from MSAC, PBAC or from HTA bodies internationally (for example NICE).  You may include one of these in your review but you should also include at least one other published study. You should also ensure that your briefing paper is based on your assessment of the evidence you have considered rather than paraphrasing/repeating the NICE or PBAC/MSAC guidance.

Your briefing paper should be in two parts and include the following:

1. An executive summary for the Minister, that summarises the technology, the comparator, the quality of the evidence, the economic evaluation, key findings, potential implications for budget and your recommendation.  (Up to 500 words)

2. A more detailed briefing paper (1200-1500 words) that addresses the following issues.

·         The context for the health technology, including the appropriate comparator, the population and circumstances of use.

·         The nature of the evidence for the safety, efficacy and effectiveness of the new technology.

·         Your conclusions regarding safety, efficacy and effectiveness

·         The type of economic evaluation used, including the modelling approach

·         A summary of the outcome measures in the key clinical evidence and how they are translated in the economic evidence.  

·         A summary of the types of resource use that need to be considered in the economic evaluation

·         Key sources of uncertainty and assumptions

·         The findings in relation to cost-effectiveness of the technology, and your assessment of the quality of the evidence

·         Potential impacts on the Australian health budget and costs to consumers

·         Your recommendation to the Minister and justification.

3. A clear reference list including each of the technology assessment reports or paper you have reviewed and any other sources you have used.

Note: It is recommended that you discuss your chosen papers with the subject coordinators before completing your reviews.

Marking criteria:

Requirement

Excellent

Good

Satisfactory

Poor

Evidence of understanding of the decision making context

 

 

 

 

Concise and clear (for a non expert) description of the technology

 

 

 

 

Evidence of assessment of the quality of the clinical evidence

 

 

 

 

Evidence of understanding of the key components required for an economic evaluation

 

 

 

 

Evidence of understanding of key sources of uncertainty related to the technology and the evaluation

 

 

 

 

Evidence of assessment of the nature and quality of the economic evaluation

 

 

 

 

Discussion of the policy and funding implications for the Australian health system

 

 

 

 

Clarity of written expression and presentation

 

 

 

 

A clear executive summary that contains all required elements

 

 

 

 

A recommendation that is clearly justified by your assessment

 

 

 

 

 

HD:         Excellent on 7 criteria, Good on at least 1 and satisfactory on all others

D:            Excellent on at least 4 criteria, Good on at least 3 and Satisfactory on all others,

C:            Excellent on at least 1 criteria, Good on at least 6, Satisfactory on All others

 

P:            Good or Satisfactory on all criteria OR  Poor on no more than 2 criteria and           Good/Excellent                on at least 2

Subject Medicine
Due By (Pacific Time) 10/29/2013 12:00 am
Report DMCA
TutorRating
pallavi

Chat Now!

out of 1971 reviews
More..
amosmm

Chat Now!

out of 766 reviews
More..
PhyzKyd

Chat Now!

out of 1164 reviews
More..
rajdeep77

Chat Now!

out of 721 reviews
More..
sctys

Chat Now!

out of 1600 reviews
More..
sharadgreen

Chat Now!

out of 770 reviews
More..
topnotcher

Chat Now!

out of 766 reviews
More..
XXXIAO

Chat Now!

out of 680 reviews
More..
All Rights Reserved. Copyright by AceMyHW.com - Copyright Policy