Abstract:Importance: Prioritization and funding for health initiatives, including biomedical innovation, may not consistently target unmet public health needs. Objective: To (1) develop a quantitative, databased framework to identify and prioritize opportunities for biomedical product innovation investments based on a multicriteria decision-making model (MCDM) that includes comprehensive measures of public health burden and health care costs, and (2) pilot test the model. Design, setting, and participants: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) convened public and private experts to develop a model, select measures, and complete a longitudinal pilot study to identify and prioritize opportunities for investment in biomedical product innovations that have the greatest public health benefit. Cross-sectional and longitudinal data (2012-2019) for 13 pilot medical disorders were obtained from the Institute for Health Metrics Global Burden of Disease database (IHME GBD) and the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). Main outcome measures: The main outcome measure was an overall gap score reflecting high public health burden (composite measure of mortality, prevalence, years lived with disability, and health disparities), or high health care costs (composite measure of total, public, and out-of-pocket health spending) relative to low biomedical innovation. Sixteen innovation metrics were selected to reflect the pipeline of biomedical products from research and development to market approval. A higher score indicates a greater gap. Normalized composite scores were calculated for public health burden, cost, and innovation investment using the MCDM Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution method. Results: Among the 13 conditions tested in the pilot study, diabetes (0.61), osteoarthritis (0.46), and drug-use disorders (0.39) had the highest overall gap score reflecting high public health burden, or high health care costs relative to low biomedical innovation in these medical disorders. Chronic kidney disease (0.05), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (0.09), and cirrhosis and other liver diseases (0.10) had the least amount of biomedical product innovation despite similar public health burden and health care cost scores. Conclusions: In this cross-sectional pilot study, we developed and implemented a data-driven, proof-of-concept model that can help identify, quantify, and prioritize opportunities for biomedical product innovation. Quantifying the relative alignment between biomedical product innovation, public health burden, and health care cost may help identify and prioritize investments that can have the greatest public health benefit.

Quantification of Benefits for Medical Devices

Incorporating Prior Data in Quantitative Benefit–Risk Assessments: Case Study of a Bayesian Method

A Quantitative Framework to Identify and Prioritize Opportunities in Biomedical Product Innovation: A Proof-of-Concept Study

Bayesian Approach for Design and Analysis of Medical Device Trials in the Era of Modern Clinical Studies

Application the Risk-Based Maintenance for Optimizing the Overall Medical Devices Safety

Advancing structured decision‐making in drug regulation at the FDA and EMA

Quantifiable Risk Factors in Medical Equipment Management Program

An Innovative Risk Assessment Methodology for Medical Information Systems

A hybrid Bayesian network for medical device risk assessment and management

Risk Management in Medical Device Maintenance Workshops

Benefit-Risk Assessment of Medical Products Using Bayesian Multi-Criteria Augmented Decision Analysis (MCADA) for Clinical Development

Quantifying the Benefits of Digital Biomarkers and Technology-Based Study Endpoints in Clinical Trials: Project Moneyball

Are Medical Devices Cost-Effective?

Challenges in the Assessment of Medical Devices: The MedtecHTA Project

A New Methodology for Information Security Risk Assessment for Medical Devices and Its Evaluation

Joint distribution approaches to simultaneously quantifying benefit and risk

Measuring Effectiveness Based on Patient Experience (Instead of QALYs) in US Value Assessments

A Comparison of Various Aggregation Functions in Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Drug Benefit-Risk Assessment

Risk analysis applied to the process of managing medical devices in a hospital pharmacy department

Establishment of a Quantitative Medical Technology Evaluation System and Indicators within Medical Institutions

Generating Appropriate and Reliable Evidence for Value Assessment of Medical Devices: An ISPOR Medical Devices and Diagnostics Special Interest Group Report