Public engagement in choosing health priorities

We at the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) could not agree more with the points made in this issue of the journal by Chafe, Levinson and Hébert about the merits of public engagement.1 That is why the agency has had two public representatives as members on its 13-person Canadian Expert Drug Advisory Committee (CEDAC) since October 2006.

With the rising cost of many new drugs, it is increasingly important that the public viewpoint is represented when CEDAC considers issues relating to equitable access to medications. The appointment of two public members to the committee was a substantial step in CADTH’s public involvement initiative. These members, selected from a diverse group of applicants, are expected to represent the broader public interest. They have the same voting rights as CEDAC members, with all the inherent responsibilities and expectations of the committee.

Since February 2007, CADTH has also designated two public member positions on its Canadian Optimal Medical Prescribing and Utilization Service (COMPUS) Expert Review Committee. This has proven particularly beneficial to CADTH, not only for purposes of transparency, but also to ensure that CADTH’s work reflects the needs and values of Canadians.

CADTH will continue to look at opportunities for productive public engagement and involvement. There will be difficult choices ahead, and we all have a common interest in helping to ensure the sustainability of Canada’s health system, today and tomorrow.