Summary Objective: This study describes the summary scores of the Short Form-12 (SF-12) questionnaire, according to socio-demographic factors obtained in a probabilistic and representative sample of the Brazilian urban population. Method: Five thousand (5,000) individuals, over the age of 15, were assessed in 16 capital cities, in the five regions of the country. The selection of households was random. Face-to-face approach was applied in the household interviews. The SF-12 questionnaire was used to assess quality of life. Demographic and socioeconomic characteristics were also evaluated: gender, age, marital status, skin color, region of the country and use of the public health service. Results: The mean value (SD) of the SF-12 for the entire population was 49.3 (8.7) for the physical component (PCS-12) and 52.7 (9.7) for the mental component (MCS-12). Statistical differences were found for gender (PCS-12 and MCS-12), age (PCS-12) and working status (PCS-12 and MCS-12). Women, elderly, widowed and unemployed individuals, those with lower income and with complaints in the last seven days showed lower mean values (PCS-12 and MCS-12). Conclusion: From this point forward, we can provide the basis for comparisons with future research that use the SF-12 for quality of life assessment in Brazil. The Brazilian population has a lower degree of quality of life related do the physical component, and the SF-12 is a useful and discriminative instrument for assessing quality of life in different socio-demographic groups.

Compare the preference measures derived from the SF-36, based on the two Brazilian versions of the Short Form 6 Dimensions questionnaire-Brazil (SF-6D Brazil). Observational and transversal study. The following quality of life assessment instruments were applied: HAQ, SF-36, EQ-5D and SF-6D (1998 and 2002 versions). Descriptive statistics and correlation coefficients were used for data analysis. The study assessed 200 patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis, with a mean age of 49.22 years, mean time with the disease of 11.16 years and mean HAQ score of 1.02. Preferences measured by the two versions of the SF-6D and by the EQ-5D showed significant correlations with one another, and Pearson coefficients ranged from 0.59 to 0.88 (p<0.01). The most current version of the SF-6D, based on the 2002 model, was found to be valid when compared to the version initially validated to Brazil and is a questionnaire alternative to assess preferences in economic analyses carried out in health care.

Background: In recent years, the potential of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) in the health field has been discussed widely. However, most MCDA methodologies have given little attention to the aggregation of different stakeholder individual perspectives.Objective: To illustrate how a paraconsistent theory-based MCDA reusable framework, designed to aid hospital-based Health Technology Assessment (HTA), could be used to aggregate individual expert perspectives when valuing cancer treatments.Methods: An MCDA methodological process was adopted based on paraconsistent theory and following ISPOR recommended steps in conducting an MCDA study. A proof-of-concept exercise focusing on identifying and assessing the global value of first-line treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) was conducted to foster the development of the MCDA framework.Results: On consultation with hospital-based HTA committee members, 11 perspectives were considered in an expert panel: medical oncology, oncologic surgery, radiotherapy, palliative care, pharmacist, health economist, epidemiologist, public health expert, health media expert, pharmaceutical industry, and patient advocate. The highest weights were assigned to the criteria “overall survival” (mean 0.22), “burden of disease” (mean 0.21) and “adverse events” (mean 0.20), and the lowest weights were given to “progression-free survival” and “cost of treatment” (mean 0.18 for both). FOLFIRI and mFlox scored the highest global value score of 0.75, followed by mFOLFOX6 with a global value score of 0.71. mIFL was ranked last with a global value score of 0.62. The paraconsistent analysis (para-analysis) of 6 first-line treatments for mCRC indicated that FOLFIRI and mFlox were the appropriate options for reimbursement in the context of this study.Conclusion: The Paraconsistent Value Framework is proposed as a step beyond the current MCDA practices, in order to improve means of dealing with individual expert perspectives in hospital-based HTA of cancer treatments.

Recently, professional and healthcare-related entities have launched frameworks designed to assess the value of cancer innovations in multistakeholder decision processes. Among the most visible entities that propose and implement value frameworks in oncology ...

In health technology assessment (HTA), decision criteria are considered relevant to support the complex deliberative process that requires simultaneous consideration of multiple factors. The aim was to identify and analyze the decision criteria that have been used by the National Health Technology Assessment Commission (CONITEC) when recommending the incorporation of technologies for the treatment of cancer. Descriptive study, based on reports from CONITEC, between 2012 and 2018, on oncology technologies. The data were collected in a specific extraction form and analyzed using descriptive statistics. 39 reports were analyzed, 15 of them did not present any explicit decision criteria. Medicines were the most frequently evaluated type of technology. The most frequent types of cancers were: breast cancer, head and neck cancer, colorectal cancer, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and lung cancer. The most frequently considered criteria were: financial impact and effectiveness. The study identified the decision criteria that have been most used in the area of oncology, however, the lack of transparency in relation to the weight of these criteria makes it difficult to understand their influence on the result of the decisions taken.