Open access

Perspective

4 November 2025

Bridging the patient gap: exploring generative AI to support meaningful patient involvement in health technology assessment

Authors: Manuel Cossio https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6004-9488 and Ramiro E Gilardino https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9238-7729Author Info & Affiliations

Publication: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research

Volume 14, Number 12

https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2025-0150

PDF OtherFormats

Abstract

Patient and public involvement in health technology assessment (HTA) has progressed from best practice to policy requirement, yet communication barriers persist. This perspective explores how plain language summaries (PLSs) and summaries of information for patients (SIPs) can enhance equity and transparency in HTA. Building on recent European regulatory developments and emerging research, it discusses the balance between accessibility, quality and feasibility. Generative artificial intelligence offers the potential to scale PLS and SIP production, but its responsible integration requires oversight, collaboration and a continued focus on equity and patient-centeredness within evolving HTA frameworks.

Supplementary Material

File (supplementary materials.docx)

Download
41.65 KB

References

1.

European Parliament and Council of the European Union. Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 on clinical trials on medicinal products for human use, and repealing Directive 2001/20/EC (2014).

2.

European Parliament and Council of the European Union. Regulation (EU) 2021/2282 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 2021 on health technology assessment and amending Directive 2011/24/EU. Off. J. Eur. Union L. 458, 1–32 (2021).

3.

Barnes A, Patrick S. Lay summaries of clinical study results: an overview. Pharmaceut. Med. 33(4), 261–268 (2019).

4.

Scottish Medicines Consortium. Guidance to manufacturers for completion of summary information for submitting patient groups form (Version 4). (2017). Available from: https://scottishmedicines.org.uk/media/2771/guidance-on-summary-information-for-patient-groups.pdf

5.

Dickson J, Taylor L, McCormack J, Downes N, Lockhart L, Walker L. OP79 improving public understanding of Scottish Medicines Consortium advice. Int. J. Tech. Assess. Health Care 35(Suppl. 1), 20 (2019).

6.

Cook N, Livingstone H, Dickson J et al. Development of an international template to support patient submissions in health technology assessments. Int. J. Tech. Assess. Health Care 37(1), e50 (2021).

7.

Coombes M, Morgan K, Diaz J et al. Plain language summaries supporting patient involvement: lessons and guidance from HTAi patient and citizen involvement interest group (PCIG). Int. J. Tech. Assess. Health Care 41(1), e59 (2025).

8.

Johnson EE, Uteh CO, Belilios E, Pearson F. Reporting of patient and public involvement in technology appraisal and assessment reports: a rapid scoping review. Patient 18(2), 109–114 (2025).

9.

Waters M. AI meets informed consent: a new era for clinical trial communication. JNCI Cancer Spectr. 9(2), pkaf028 (2025).

10.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Guidance on Onasemnogene Abeparvovec. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/hst15

11.

European Parliament and Council of the European Union. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) (2024).

12.

European Parliament and Council of the European Union. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data (General Data Protection Regulation) (2016).

13.

European Parliament and Council of the European Union. Regulation (EU) 2025/327 on the European Health Data Space (2025).

14.

Carapinha JL, Botes D, Carapinha R. Balancing innovation and ethics in AI governance for health technology assessment. J. Med. Econ. 27(1), 754–757 (2024).

15.

Zemplényi A, Tachkov K, Balkanyi L et al. Recommendations to overcome barriers to the use of artificial intelligence-driven evidence in health technology assessment. Front. Public Health 11, 1088121 (2023).

16.

Fleurence RL, Bian J, Wang X et al. Generative artificial intelligence for health technology assessment: opportunities, challenges, and policy considerations—an ISPOR Working Group report. Value Health 28(2), 175–183 (2025).

17.

Hendy A, Abdelrehim M, Sharaf A et al. How good are GPT models at machine translation? A comprehensive evaluation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.09210 (2023). Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.09210

|