Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 7
FIRST CONSIDERATIONS
In response to the interest expressed in re-establishing a forum for
medical technology assessment, the Institute on June 16, 1982, convened
representatives from professional societies, industry, academia, govern-
ment, and third-party payers for health care. They were to initiate
consideration of such questions as what assessment functions were needed,
what organizational structure might best meet the need, what auspices
might best suit the structure, and what might be the source of funds for
such an organization.
Participants variously suggested that functions of a new organization
might include (1) the setting of priorities for the conduct of medical
technology assessments, (2) supporting and/or conducting such assessments,
(3) widely disseminating the results of assessments, (4) supporting
research and development of assessment methods, (5) acting as a catalyst
for the discussion of assessment issues, and (6) providing a clearing-
house for information about assessment. There was ready consensus about
the need for timely information that could be used by a variety of
organizations and individuals in making decisions appropriate to their
own concerns.
The meeting made it clear that much further effort would be necessary
to develop widely acceptable definitions of technology assessment, to
outline the scope of activity of any new entity hoping to coordinate
asessment, and to develop a plan of action for establishing and funding
such an entity. Success in attracting funding was seen as heavily
dependent on the creation of a specific proposal that would cover the
six tasks listed above.
Important functions not now being adequately performed in various
technology assessment efforts were identified by the meeting partici-
pants. Included were the lack of a central clearinghouse, the lack of
an entity with prime responsibility for coordination and synthesis of
assessment information for wide dissemination and education, and the
lack of any significant entity responsible for supporting research in
assessment.
Conferees discussed several advantages of basing a new entity in the
private sector and supporting it with both private and public funds.
First, a private base could attract broader support from health care
professionals and the industry as a whole by being outside of government
and its regulatory activities. Second, an essentially private-sector
organization would be less subject to political pressures than would a
government agency, and therefore could conduct its activities in a more
neutral and stable context. Last, a private entity could be seen as
more accessible and responsive to its supporters, and could be hoped to
7
OCR for page 8
perform with more alacrity and effectiveness.
Possible disadvantages to an entity based in the private sector,
conferees conceded, could include considerable difficulty in securing
adequate long-tenm support for the establishment of effective programs,
and an inference of bias in favor of the marketing and profit incentives
of private enterprise.
Participants requested the Institute to take the lead in developing
a plan for the establishment of a private/public sector activity in
medical technology assessment.
8
Representative terms from entire chapter:
supporting research
