PHGEN

The interconnection between the terms:

The terms of relevance and reliability both refer to the quality of a HTA report. Therefore the terms are very important in the context of adaptation as foreign users would assess the quality of a report before they choose to adapt them. Still, there is a substantial difference between the concepts behind the two terms as they point in a different direction. The relevance of a report is conceived as relative or subjective, that means the relevance is the relevance for the user and not a general overall relevance. The relevance therefore depends on the setting, the knowledge of the adapting person and the policy question. In contrast to that, reliability is an issue that users can assess in a standardised way, as a report is reliable if the science basis and the spread-sheet-models are of high quality. Relevance and reliability must be seen in different matrixes, as a report might be very relevant even if it is scientifically outdated and vice versa.

How to link the terms in HTA?

According to our experience and the way HTA reports are used in Germany, it is very important that these terms are not mixed up. We have many reliable reports which are totally irrelevant and we have many unreliable reports which are still used and therefore they are relevant (sometimes as negative examples). The reliability depends on the scientific quality of the report whereas the relevance depends on the policy question and its relevance in a given setting. The relevance might be different from country to country, but we should strive for unified standards of reliability measures as the reliability is the key to adaptation. Reliability and not relevance is the key incentive to use a foreign HTA report.