We are inviting eligible individuals and research teams to submit creative solutions as part of our Valuing Innovation Project (VIP) Call for Papers to advance research on a set of prioritized questions to better define, measure, and reward innovations in the context of health technology assessment (HTA).

To submit an entry, applicants should e-mail the abstract and required materials (see details below) to research@thevalueinitiative.org by April 10, 2023, 11:59 PM PT (CLOSED).


Awards will be announced in August 2023. The top three papers will be awarded the following prizes:

  • First Prize: $25,000

  • Second Prize: $15,000

  • Third Prize: $10,000

Research Initiative

Submissions to the Call to Papers should provide innovative ideas to address one or more of the following research questions, prioritized from cross-stakeholder discussions from the first two phases of the Valuing Innovation Project (Phase 1 – IVI Methods Summit, and Phase 2 – Expert Roundtable).

Secondary considerations will also be given to research that also addresses the following questions:

  • How can we make better use of qualitative and quantitative patient input (e.g., unmet needs) to inform the processes and methods of HTA?
  • How can different stakeholders better coordinate data collection efforts to address critical gaps in quantifying the value of innovation in HTA?
  • How do we develop a consensus framework on the definitions and measurement of innovations in HTA?


We welcome submissions from interested individuals or teams from for-profit and nonprofit institutions, worldwide. The same author(s) may submit multiple entries for different ideas. We encourage submissions from young researchers, professionals and individuals from underrepresented communities in research. Only studies that align with the stated research interest of this Call for Papers are eligible for consideration. Articles that have been previously published in a journal or are currently considered for publication in a journal are not eligible.

Selected papers invited for second round full-paper submissions may also be published in a journal as a special themed section/supplement.

Types of Submissions

We will accept a broad range of articles including conceptual, methodological, and empirical papers.

  • Conceptual papers generally propose novel ideas and solutions that include original concepts or frameworks and may or may not include mathematical derivations or empirical analyses.
  • Methodological papers include (but are not limited t0) submissions that describe, test, or optimize the application of novel or existing measurements or methods in HTA.
  • Empirical papers generally refer to studies that report key findings based on actual or experimental data (e.g., using an econometric technique to estimate the scale of the scientific spillover).

See Select References below for examples of different types of papers.

Application Process and Timeline

The call for papers will begin with a first round of abstract submissions and review, followed by a second round of submissions and review of full-length papers by invited candidates. Details are provided below. All questions should be submitted to Richard Xie at richard.xie@thevalueinitiative.org.

Round 1: Abstract Submissions and Review

To submit an entry to the call for papers, applicants should e-mail the required materials listed below to research@thevalueinitiative.org by April 10, 2023, 11:59 PM PT.

  • Completed application form (View and Download Application)
  • Extended research abstract (title, specific research question, proposed solutions/ideas, expected impacts)
    • May include relevant references or preliminary results
    • Structured format optional
    • Two (2) figures/tables may be included
    • Format should be one single-spaced page, U.S. letter size (8.5″ x 11.0″), 0.5″ margin, 12 point font, excluding figures/tables and references
  • CVs for all research team members

Save each document in Microsoft Word format and send as separate attachments in one e-mail. File name should be specified as File Format: FirstName LastName Title.

Round 2: Invited Full Paper Submissions

Upon review by a judging panel, abstracts selected will be invited to submit a full-length paper, which will include the following:

  • Title
  • Authors and affiliations
  • Abstract (300 words), either structured or unstructured format
  • Three key take-aways (100 words)
  • Main text that should not exceed 5,000 words, excluding figures/tables, references, and supplemental materials. The main text may include some or all of the following relevant sections:
    • Background
    • Specific research questions
    • Research design,  novel methods, concepts, or ideas
    • Key findings, discussions, limitations, and policy implications
  • References
  • Figures/tables (up to 5)
  • Supplementary materials (up to 20 pages)

Judging Panel

Mike Graglia, MBA, MA

Anna Hyde, MA

Walter Kowtoniuk, PhD

Josh Krieger, PhD

Maia Laing, MBA

Judging Criteria

All submissions will be blinded in the review process. The abstracts and full papers will be judged on the following criteria:

  • Does the research effectively address one or more of the questions specified above in the call for papers?
  • Has the research provided innovative thinking to help advance methods and practices to better define, measure, and reward innovations in HTA?
  • For methods-focused and empirical research papers, does the proposed research design support the objective(s) of the study? Is the research design rigorous? Are the research members qualified to implement the study within the call of papers period?
  • To what extent do the proposed papers provide actionable strategies that different stakeholders can implement to address existing gaps in research and practices of HTA?
  • To what extent do the proposed papers demonstrate alignment with the core principles of IVI in health technology assessment, particularly patient-centeredness, stakeholder engagement, and health equity?

Select References

  1. Xie RZ, Towse A, Garrison LP. Should We Pay for Scientific Knowledge Spillovers? The Underappreciated Value of “Failed” R&D Efforts. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2022;38(1):e31. doi:10.1017/S0266462322000150
  2. Lakdawalla DN, Doshi JA, Garrison LP, Phelps CE, Basu A, Danzon PM. Defining Elements of Value in Health Care—A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [3]. Value in Health. 2018;21(2):131-139. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2017.12.007
  3. Garrison LP, Kamal-Bahl S, Towse A. Toward a Broader Concept of Value: Identifying and Defining Elements for an Expanded Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Value in Health. 2017;20(2):213-216. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2016.12.005
  4. Li M, Garrison L, Lee W, Kowal S, Wong W, Veenstra D. A Pragmatic Guide to Assessing Real Option Value for Medical Technologies. Value in Health. 2022;0(0). doi:10.1016/J.JVAL.2022.05.014
  5. Smith RD, Yago M, Millar M, Coast J. Assessing the macroeconomic impact of a healthcare problem: The application of computable general equilibrium analysis to antimicrobial resistance. J Health Econ. 2005;24(6):1055-1075. doi:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2005.02.003
  6. Keogh-Brown MR, Jensen HT, Edmunds WJ, Smith RD. The impact of Covid-19, associated behaviours and policies on the UK economy: A computable general equilibrium model. SSM Popul Health. 2020;12:100651. doi:10.1016/j.ssmph.2020.100651
  7. Sanders GD, Neumann PJ, Basu A, et al. Recommendations for conduct, methodological practices, and reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses: Second panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA – Journal of the American Medical Association. 2016;316(10):1093-1103. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.12195
  8. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Patient-Focused Drug Development: Collecting Comprehensive and Representative Input Guidance for Industry, Food and Drug Administration Staff, and Other Stakeholders.; 2020. Accessed January 30, 2021. https://www.fda.gov/media/139088/download
  9. Perfetto EM, Oehrlein EM, Love TR, Schoch S, Kennedy A, Bright J. Patient-Centered Core Impact Sets: What They are and Why We Need Them. Patient. Published online June 2, 2022. doi:10.1007/S40271-022-00583-X
  10. dosReis S, Butler B, Caicedo J, et al. Stakeholder-Engaged Derivation of Patient-Informed Value Elements. Patient. 2020;13(5):611-621. doi:10.1007/s40271-020-00433-8