Skip to main content Accessibility help


  • Lyazzat Kosherbayeva (a1), David Hailey (a2), Kural Kurakbaev (a3), Adlet Tabarov (a4), Ainur Kumar (a3), Gulnara Gutzskaya (a5) and Elena Stepkina (a6)...


Objectives: The aim of this study was to develop criteria for the prioritization of topics for health technology assessment (HTA) in the healthcare system of Kazakhstan.

Methods: Initial proposals for criteria were suggested through consultation with Ministry of Health (MoH) policy areas. These were refined through a workshop attended by HTA department staff, persons from medical universities and research institutes, and MoH policy makers. The workshop included discussion on methods used in international HTA practice. Opinions of participants on selection of criteria from those specified in a review of prioritization processes were used to define a list for inclusion in an instrument for routine use. A scoring system was established in later discussion.

Results: Selected criteria for HTA prioritization were burden of disease, availability of alternative technology, clinical effectiveness, economic efficiency, budget impact, and ethical, legal, and/or psychosocial aspects. For each criterion, a health technology under consideration is given a score from 3 (High) to 1 (Low). The total score determines whether the technology is of high to medium priority or of low priority. Determination of priorities for assessment, using the instrument, should be carried out by an expert group appointed by the MoH. The process was applied in 2014 to a selection of topics, and three health technologies were chosen for full assessments.

Conclusions: Criteria for prioritization have evolved with development of the HTA program in Kazakhstan. A method for HTA prioritization has been developed that is easy to apply, requires comparatively few resources, and is compatible with processes required by the MoH.



Hide All
1. Government, State Reform and Development Program of Health of the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2005-2010 (approved by Decree No. 1438 of 13 September 2004, 51 pp). Astana: Republic of Kazakhstan.
2. The World Bank. The “Kazakhstan health sector Technology transfer and institutional reform project” P101928/. (accessed March 18, 2013).
3. Muratov, S, Hailey, D, Foerster, V, et al. Mentoring the development of a health technology assessment initiative in Kazakhstan. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2014;30:16.
4. Henshall, C, Oortwijn, WJ, Stevens, A, Granados, A, Banta, HD. Priority setting for health technology assessment: Theoretical consideration and practical approaches. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1997;319:12931295.
5. Oortwijn, WJ. First things first, Priority setting for health technology assessment (PhD thesis) 2000, Leiden.
6. Davies, L, Drummond, M, Papanikoloau, P. Prioritising investments in health technology assessment: Can we assess the potential value for money? York: University or York, Center for Health Economics; 1999.
7. Department of Science and Technology. Health technology assessment: A selection of studies supported by Decit, Brasilia: F Series. Communication and Education in Health, Ministry of Health, Secretariat of Science, Technology and Strategic Inputs; 2011.
8. National Healthcare Development Program of the Republic of KazakhstanSalamatty Kazakhstan” for 2011-2015. Astana: Republic of Kazakhstan.
9. Noorani, HZ, Husereau, DR, Boudreau, R, Skidmore, B. Priority setting for health technology assessments: A systematic review of current practical approaches. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2007;23:310315
10. Husereau, D, Boucher, M, Noorani, H. Priority setting for health technology assessment at CADTH. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2010;26:341347.



Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed