Skip to main content

Saudi Gastroenterology Association · Open course

Facilitator guide

For anyone teaching this course in a workshop or journal club: timings, discussion prompts and common misconceptions for each module.

1. What HTA is — and where it sits in Saudi Arabia

20 min
Lecture
25 min
Discussion
15 min
Exercises
60 min
Total

Discussion prompts

  • Think of a product your hospital approved last year. Who made each decision between approval and the first patient treated?
  • When would an HTA recommend spending more than the current practice?
  • Which domains would you weight most for a drug, and which for a test?

Common misconceptions

  • Misconception: HTA exists to reject expensive drugs.

    Correction: HTA estimates value. Many assessments recommend adoption, sometimes at a negotiated price.

  • Misconception: A guideline recommendation is the same as a coverage decision.

    Correction: Guidelines rank clinical options; payers also consider cost, budget and equity.

Transition: Now that we know what HTA is for, the next step is the most important: framing the decision problem precisely.

Resources: HTAA glossary: ملف تقييم التقنية الصحية · Module 1 self-check bank

2. Framing the decision problem

20 min
Lecture
30 min
Discussion
25 min
Exercises
75 min
Total

Discussion prompts

  • Rewrite “Is vedolizumab good for Crohn’s disease?” as a full PICOTS statement.
  • Which comparator would your own hospital use, and does the trial literature include it?
  • Name one surrogate endpoint in IBD and say how strong the link is to patient outcomes.

Common misconceptions

  • Misconception: Placebo is always the right comparator because it is the cleanest.

    Correction: Placebo is cleanest for efficacy; decisions need the relevant active comparator.

  • Misconception: A longer horizon always makes the drug look better.

    Correction: It makes the estimate more complete. Long horizons can raise or lower the ICER.

Transition: With the question fixed, we ask what the evidence says and how certain it is.

Resources: PICOTS worksheet (print from this page) · Module 2 self-check bank

3. Clinical evidence: synthesis, indirect comparison and certainty

25 min
Lecture
30 min
Discussion
35 min
Exercises
90 min
Total

Discussion prompts

  • Why are head-to-head IBD trials so rare, and what does that do to HTA?
  • Take the A vs B example and change the log SEs. How wide does the interval become?
  • Which GRADE domain is most often the problem in IBD surgery outcomes?

Common misconceptions

  • Misconception: A higher point estimate means a better drug.

    Correction: Decisions use the interval and certainty, not the point estimate alone.

  • Misconception: Network meta-analysis is equivalent to a head-to-head trial.

    Correction: It depends on untestable similarity assumptions and is usually lower certainty.

Transition: Effect estimates are one input. Next we put them next to costs in an economic evaluation.

Resources: Calculators: QALY and NNT/cost per responder · Module 3 self-check bank

4. Economic evaluation: costs, QALYs and the ICER

30 min
Lecture
35 min
Discussion
40 min
Exercises
105 min
Total

Discussion prompts

  • Use the calculators to find the price at which the ICER equals SAR 150,000.
  • Which Markov states would you include for Crohn’s disease with perianal fistula?
  • Why is a threshold not a rule?

Common misconceptions

  • Misconception: A cost-effective drug saves money.

    Correction: Cost-effective means good value, not cheaper. Many cost-effective drugs raise total spending.

  • Misconception: The ICER is a fact about the drug.

    Correction: It is a model output that depends on assumptions, comparator, horizon and prices.

Transition: Even a cost-effective technology can be unaffordable. Next we ask what it does to the budget.

Resources: Calculators: ICER, net benefit, threshold price, discounting · Simulator: appraisal committee

5. Budget impact and affordability

20 min
Lecture
25 min
Discussion
30 min
Exercises
75 min
Total

Discussion prompts

  • Who pays and who saves when a hospital switches to a biosimilar?
  • Which BIA input would you check first in a sponsor dossier?
  • How would you phase access when demand exceeds the budget?

Common misconceptions

  • Misconception: If a drug is cost-effective, the payer must fund it.

    Correction: Payers also face a budget constraint; affordability is a separate test.

  • Misconception: Biosimilar savings are automatic.

    Correction: They require tenders, switching programmes and clinician and patient confidence.

Transition: The numbers are in. Now we discuss what the numbers leave out.

Resources: Calculators: budget impact, biosimilar savings · Module 5 self-check bank

6. Beyond the numbers: values, equity and deliberation

20 min
Lecture
35 min
Discussion
20 min
Exercises
75 min
Total

Discussion prompts

  • Run the MCDA exercise in small groups with different weights. Does the ranking change?
  • Which interests should disqualify a member from voting?
  • How would you involve a patient with ulcerative colitis meaningfully, not tokenistically?

Common misconceptions

  • Misconception: MCDA removes subjectivity.

    Correction: It makes subjectivity visible and consistent.

  • Misconception: Equity arguments are non-scientific.

    Correction: Equity is a legitimate criterion; the requirement is to state it and apply it consistently.

Transition: Drugs are only one kind of technology. Tests, devices and algorithms need different evidence.

Resources: HTAA published process steps · Module 6 self-check bank

7. Devices, diagnostics and AI

25 min
Lecture
30 min
Discussion
35 min
Exercises
90 min
Total

Discussion prompts

  • List the downstream consequences of a false-positive FIT in your service.
  • What outcome would convince you that CADe is worth buying?
  • Who is responsible for monitoring an adaptive algorithm after deployment?

Common misconceptions

  • Misconception: Higher detection always means better care.

    Correction: It can include low-risk findings and add surveillance burden. Outcome links must be shown.

  • Misconception: AI is validated once and stays valid.

    Correction: Performance changes with data, setting and updates and must be monitored.

Transition: Some uncertainty cannot be resolved before launch. Next: sharing risk and coming back to the decision.

Resources: Calculator: cost per additional detection · HTAA pathways for devices and diagnostics

8. Managed entry, real-world evidence and reassessment

20 min
Lecture
30 min
Discussion
25 min
Exercises
75 min
Total

Discussion prompts

  • Design three registry variables needed to judge a conditional MASH therapy agreement.
  • When is a confidential price compatible with public accountability?
  • What would make you disinvest from a biologic?

Common misconceptions

  • Misconception: Managed entry always saves money.

    Correction: Administration can outweigh gains; agreements must be evaluated too.

  • Misconception: Real-world evidence replaces randomised trials.

    Correction: It complements them but is vulnerable to confounding.

Transition: This is the end of the course. Use the post-test and the simulator to consolidate.

Resources: Simulator: outcomes-based agreement · HTAA reassessment page

Method and terminology adapted from the HTA Society (HTAA) platform, which describes its own content as draft and pending board approval. SGA authored the GI examples and figures here; HTAA has not reviewed them. HTAA platform

Educational content only. Figures in examples, calculators and simulators are illustrative — they are not Saudi price or cost data and do not represent any coverage, pricing or official policy decision.

Share this