Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 9, No. 1, 2006
Issue release date: February 2006
Community Genet 2006;9:27–33
(DOI:10.1159/000090690)

Managing Partnerships and Impact on Decision-Making: The Example of Health Technology Assessment in Genetics

Blancquaert I.
Agence d’évaluation des technologies et des modes d’intervention en santé, Montréal, Canada

Individual Users: Register with Karger Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password





Contact Information











I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in

Abstract

For an emerging field such as Public Health Genetics, the partnerships that will be developed with stakeholders are of strategic importance, since they may affect long-term impact on policy-making. A concrete example in the field of health technology assessment in genetics was chosen to illustrate how the context in which scientific advisory bodies operate and the nature of partnerships developed over time influence the impact on decision-making at different levels, from the micro (professional) level through the meso (institutional) level to the macro (policy) level. As pointed out in the knowledge transfer literature, impact is not only reflected by instrumental use of knowledge, but also by problem-framing and strategic use of knowledge. Solid partnerships at the micro level, with researchers and health care professionals, are essential to build credibility and trust, and they lay the groundwork for contextualized and relevant advice and potential impact at the policy level. Even though maintaining the necessary critical distance with respect to all stakeholders is easier for institutions that are at arm’s length from government, achieving the right balance between an institution’s independence and service relationship is a real challenge.



Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

References

  1. INAHTA, see http://www.inahta.org.
  2. Battista RN, Jacob R: Évaluation et régulation du système de santé au Québec; in Matillon Y, Durieux P (eds): L’évaluation médicale: du concept à la pratique. Paris, Flammarion Médecine-Sciences, 1994, pp 147–153.
  3. Blancquaert I, Caron L: Le syndrome du X fragile: la place du diagnostic moléculaire et du dépistage dans une approche intégrée des services. Rapport préparé pour l’Agence d’évaluation des technologies et des modes d’intervention en santé. Montréal, AETMIS (01–1 RF), 2001, xxvii-191p. http://www.aetmis.gouv.qc.ca/fr/publications/scientifiques/depistage/2001_01_en.pdf.
  4. Chikhaoui Y: Tyrosinémie héréditaire de type I: contribution de la génétique moléculaire au dépistage familial des porteurs. Rapport préparé pour le Conseil d’évaluation des technologies de la santé du Québec. Montréal, CÉTS (98–2 RF), 1998, xxi-60p.
  5. Bouchard L, Blancquaert I: Dépistage familial et diagnostic moléculaire de la dystrophie myotonique de Steinert. Rapport préparé pour le Conseil d’évaluation des technologies de la santé du Québec. Montréal, CÉTS (97–7 RF), 1997, xxii-58p.
  6. Blancquaert I, Bouchard L: Dépistage familial et diagnostic moléculaire des dystrophies de Duchenne et de Becker. Rapport préparé pour le Conseil d’évaluation des technologies de la santé du Québec. Montréal, CÉTS (97–1 RF), 1997, xvi-56p.
  7. Bouchard L, Blancquaert I: Un cadre d’évaluation des technologies génétiques: le diagnostic et le dépistage des porteurs de la maladie de Steinert; in Mélançon MJ, Gagné R (eds): Dépistage et diagnostic génétiques: aspects cliniques, juridiques, éthiques et sociaux. Québec, PUL, 1999, pp 83–102.
  8. Blancquaert I, Bouchard L, Chikhaoui Y, Cleret de Langavant G: Molecular genetics viewed from the health technology assessment perspective. 10th International Congress of Human Genetics. Vienna, May 15–19, 2001.
  9. Blancquaert I, Cleret de Langavant G, Bouchard L: L’évaluation des technologies de la santé à l’ère de la génomique. Le défi de la complexité. Ruptures 2002;9:22–38.
  10. Cleret de Langavant G, Blancquaert I, Obadia A: A conceptual framework to assist policy-making in the field of genetics. Genome Canada GE3LS Symposium. Vancouver, February 5–7, 2004.
  11. Blancquaert I, Cleret de Langavant G, Obadia A: Les applications de la recherche en génétique dans les services de santé: modalités d’encadrement. Montréal, AETMIS, in preparation.
  12. Gaudet D, Avard D, Bégin P, Blancquaert I, Bouchard G, Cleret de Langavant G, Couture P, Gossard F, Grant A, Hamet P, Hudson TJ, Julien P, Knoppers BM, Laberge C, Laprise C, Mathieu J, Noreau L, Pausova Z, Perron M, Perron P, Pérusse L, Prevost C, Tremblay J, Tremblay M, Veillette S, Vézina H, Vigneault A, Vohl MC: Le projet ECOGENE-21: le défi du transfert à la communauté des connais sances sur le génome humain. 4e réunion annuelle de la société québécoise de lipidologie, nutrition et métabolisme. Québec, April 24–26, 2003. Médecine/Sciences 2003;19:xiii.
  13. Denis JL, Lomas J: Convergent evolution: the academic and policy roots of collaborative research. J Health Serv Res Policy 2003;8(S2): 1–6.
  14. Black N: Evidence based policy: proceed with care. BMJ 2001;323:275–279.
  15. Noseworthy T, Watanabe M: Health policy directions for evidence-based decision making in Canada. J Eval Clin Pract 1999;5:227–242.
  16. Romanow RJ: Building on values: The Future of Health Care in Canada. Saskatoon, Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada, 2002.
  17. Kirby MJL: The Health of Canadians – The Federal Role; vol 5: Principles and Recommendations for Reform. Part I. Ottawa, Senate Standing Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, 2002.
  18. Québec Commission d’étude sur les services de santé et les services sociaux et Clair M: Les solutions émergentes: rapport et recommandations. Québec, Commission d’étude sur les services de santé et les services sociaux, 2000.
  19. Saskatchewan Commission on Medicare: Caring for Medicare: Sustaining a quality system. Regina, Commission on Medicare, Policy and Planning Branch, 2001.
  20. Mazankowski D, Alberta Advisory Council on Health: A framework for reform. Edmonton, Advisory Council on Health, 2002. http://www.premiersadvisory.com/pdf/PACH_ report_final.pdf.
  21. Health Technology Assessment Task Group: Health Technology Strategy 1.0 – Final Report. Ottawa, Federal/Provincial/Territorial Advisory Committee on Information and Emerging Technologies, 2004. http://www. hc-sc.gc.ca/ohih-bsi/pubs/2004_tech/techstrat_e.html.
  22. Health Technology Assessment in Genetics and Policy-making in Canada: Towards a sustainable development. Report from a symposium held in Montreal, September 11–12, 2003. http://www.aetmis.gouv.qc.ca/fr/publications/congres/genetique/rap_sympo_gen_en.pdf.
  23. Cleret de Langavant G, Blancquaert I, Battista RN: APOGEE-Net: une stratégie innovatrice de transfert des connaissances dans le domaine des politiques de santé en génétique; in Génétique: Partage des connaissances et appropriation des savoirs, in press.
  24. Lavis J, Ross S, McLeod C, Gildiner A: Measuring the impact of health research. J Health Serv Res Policy 2003;8:165–170.
  25. Denis JL, Lehoux P, Champagne F: Knowledge utilization in health care: from fine-tuning dissemination to contextualizing knowledge; inLemieux-Charles L, Champagne F (eds): Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Evidence-Based Decision-Making in Health Care. Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 2004.
  26. Canadian Health Services Research Foundation: Harnessing Knowledge, Transferring Research. Ottawa, Canadian Health Services Research Foundation, 2002.
  27. Elliot H, Popay J: How are policy-makers using evidence? Models of research utilisation and local NHS policy-making. J Epidemiol Community Health 2000;54:461–468.


Pay-per-View Options
Direct payment This item at the regular price: USD 38.00
Payment from account With a Karger Pay-per-View account (down payment USD 150) you profit from a special rate for this and other single items.
This item at the discounted price: USD 26.50