SUBMISSION INFORMATION

  • ISPOR issue panels are designed to stimulate real debate on new or controversial topics in health economics and outcomes research or use of outcomes research in healthcare decision making.
  • A successful issue panel will debate an important and/or timely HEOR issue. Each panelist is expected to provide a different perspective on the issue.
  • To assure lively discussion, panelists should be from different institutions and/or work environments.
  • Example of an issue panel proposal submission is available here.

SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

Issue panel submissions should be organized as follows:

  • TITLE: Provide a title that accurately describes the issue and is framed as a question. The title should be in all CAPS.Examples:
    • MULTI-INDICATION PRICING: DO WE WANT IT? CAN WE OPERATIONALIZE IT?
    • DESIGNING A PATIENT-CENTERED VALUE FRAMEWORK TO GUIDE SHARED DECISION MAKINGIN ONCOLOGY: WHY, WHAT, AND HOW?
    • ARE EXISTING HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS INADEQUATE FORESTABLISHING VALUE FOR POTENTIALLY TRANSFORMATIVE GENE THERAPIES?
  • MODERATOR/PANELISTS: An issue panel is comprised of 1 moderator and a minimum of 2 and maximum of 3 panelists.
    • To assure lively debate, panelists should be from different institutions and/or work environments representing different perspectives on the debate.
    • Panelists should present distinct views on the topic.
    • Provide the names, degrees, positions, city, state, country and email addresses for the moderator/panelists.
  • SUBJECT FOR DEBATE: A successful issue panel will debate an issue and have multiple perspectives represented by the panelists. Provide the question which will be the subject of the debate.
  • ISSUE: Provide a clear definition of the issue to be presented and debated.
  • OVERVIEW: Provide background information and details on the material to be presented. Include speaker presentation length, e.g., 15 minutes, and state the allotted time to address the audience discussion and debate criterion. It is helpful to include which stakeholders will benefit from attending.
  • LENGTH of PROPOSAL (Issue and Overview): 300 words
  • PANELIST’S PERSPECTIVE: Provide a description of each panelist’s perspective on the debate topic.
    • Example 1: Dr. Glick will discuss challenges in designing a patient-centered value framework, including addressing tensions between the societal and patient perspective. Ms. Sonet will represent patient perspectives, offering insights from patient-centered research conducted by CancerCare. She will highlight factors important to cancer patients and approaches to collecting such information in clinical practice to support a customized patient-centered decision tool. Dr. Phelps will argue that methods such as multi-criteria decision analysis can be used to develop a scoring approach to inform shared decision-making using a customized tool.
    • Example 2: Jaime Caro will argue that the development of open-source models is essential for cost-effectiveness analysis to be viewed as a reliable input to decision making and Renée Arnold will argue that the impact on intellectual property rights, model “ownership”, oversite and, consequently, the incentives and resources available to develop and maintain models are prohibitive.

TOPIC CATEGORIES AND SUB-CATEGORIES FOR ISSUE PANEL SUBMISSIONS

Select the topic/subtopic that best describes your proposal from the list below. Click on the topics below to see their respective subtopics.

Clinical Outcomes

Comparative Effectiveness or Efficacy

Performance-based Outcomes

Clinician Outcomes Assessment

Relating Intermediate to Long-term Outcomes

Economic Evaluation

Cost/Cost of Illness/Resource Use Studies

Cost-comparison/effectiveness/utility/benefit Analysis

Budget Impact Analysis

Thresholds & Opportunity Cost

Trial-based economic evaluation

Work & Home Productivity - Indirect Costs

Value of Information

Novel & Social Elements of Value

Epidemiology & Public Health

Safety & Pharmacoepidemiology

Public Health

Prevalence, Incidence, & Disease Risk Factors

Disease Classification & Coding

 

Health Policy & Regulatory

Approval & Labeling

Pricing Policy & Schemes

Reimbursement & Access Policy

Insurance Systems & National Health Care

Public Spending & National Health Expenditures

Procurement Systems

Coverage with Evidence Development & Adaptive Pathways

Risk-sharing Approaches

Health Disparities & Equity

 

Health Service Delivery & Process of Care

Hospital and Clinical Practices

Prescribing Behavior

Pharmacist Interventions and Practices

Formulary Development

Telemedicine

Quality of Care Measurement

Disease Management

Treatment Patterns and Guidelines

Health Technology Assessment

Systems & Structure

Value Frameworks & Dossier Format

Decision & Deliberative Processes

 

Medical Technologies

Medical Devices

Digital Health

Diagnostics & Imaging

Implementation Science

 

Methodological & Statistical Research

Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Predictive Analytics

Missing Data

Confounding, Selection Bias Correction, Causal Inference

Modeling & Simulation

PRO & Related Methods

Survey Methods

 

Patient-Centered Research

Adherence, Persistence, & Compliance

Stated Preference & Patient Satisfaction

Health State Utilities

Patient-reported Outcomes & Quality of Life Outcomes

Patient Behavior and Incentives

Patient Engagement

Instrument Development, Validation, & Translation

 

Organizational Practices

Academic & Educational

Industry

Ethical

Best Research Practices

Geographic & Regional

 

Real World Data & Information Systems

Data Protection, Integrity, & Quality Assurance

Health & Insurance Records Systems

Distributed Data & Research Networks

Reproducibility & Replicability

 

Study Approaches

Clinical Trials

Pragmatic Trials & Large Simple Trials

Prospective Observational Studies 

Electronic Medical & Health Records

Registries

Administrative Claims Data

Surveys & Expert Panels

Decision Modeling & Simulation

Literature Review & Synthesis

Meta-analysis & Indirect Comparisons

 

CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF ISSUE PANELS

Overall, issue panel acceptance is based on the quality of the proposal/debate presented and the topic’s importance for inclusion and discussion in this conference’s scientific program.
All issue panel submissions are judged according to these criteria:

  • The information / issue(s) presented are valuable to the health economic & outcomes researcher or the healthcare decision-maker
  • Is the issue panel clearly a debate on an issue?
  • Is the issue clearly defined?
  • Is more than one perspective identified?
  • Is the background information (included in the overview) clear and concise?
  • Is there time allotted for audience discussion and debate?
  • Presenter diversity, i.e., different stakeholders, work environments and/or geographic locations.

Submit An Abstract - ISPOR 2019
Submit An Abstract - ISPOR Latin America 2019

Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×