Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-27T12:18:07.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

PP70 Mapping Of Health Technology Assessment In China: A Comparative Study Between 2016 And 2021

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 December 2023

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]


Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This study aimed to compare changes in the level of health technology assessment (HTA) development from 2016 to 2021, and to inform policies and decisions to promote further development of HTA in China.


We conducted a cross-sectional and anonymous web-based survey to relevant stakeholders in China in 2016 and 2021 respectively. The mapping of the HTA instrument was used to reflect the HTA development from eight domains. To reduce the influence of confounders and to compare the mapping outcomes between 2016 and 2021 groups, we performed 1:1 propensity score matching methodology in this study. Univariate analysis was performed to compare the differences in these two groups. We also compared the overall results with that of a mapping study that included ten countries.


A total of 212 and 255 respondents completed the survey in 2016 and 2021 respectively. After propensity score matching methodology, 183 cases from the 2016 group and 2021 group were matched. Overall, the mean score of 2021 in most of the domains was higher than in 2016 in China (p < 0.05), matching the level of HTA institutionalization and dissemination strategy, except for the assessment domain. Although China scored significantly lower among the three developed countries, the overall HTA development score for China was comparable among the ten countries.


Our study suggested the level of HTA development in China has made great progress from 2016 to 2021. Prior to HTA activities, the researcher or policy makers should first formulate an explicit assessment goal and scope, and during the assessment process, more attention should be paid to the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness indicator to ensure a higher quality of HTA evidence.

Poster Presentations
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press