A: At the start of the review process, the names of the authors are removed from the abstracts to allow for blinded review. Next, the meeting co-chairs assess whether each abstract meets the minimum criteria for review and request that all tenured members of the Academy review and rate each candidate abstract along a structured form (Superior, Good, Acceptable, Unacceptable). If members have conflicts of interest (e.g., co-authorship) or the abstract is beyond their subject matter capabilities, those members will use a rating of Abstention. Regardless, tenured members are asked to provide clear, written justification for their ratings on all candidate abstracts.
17th Annual IAHPR Meeting
We are excited about our 17th IAHPR Annual Meeting! The meeting will take place at the Duke-NUS Medical School in Singapore, from October 5 to October 7, 2026.
We will bring together researchers, scholars, and practitioners from around the world to discuss the latest advancements in health preference research. We invite you to submit your abstracts and be part of this important event!
Stay tuned for more details on registration, program highlights, and keynote speakers. We look forward to your participation and contributions to make this meeting a great success.
- Location: Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore
- Dates: October 5 – October 7, 2026
Key Dates to Take Note of:
- Abstract Submission Deadline: April 30, 2026
- Result Notification: May 20, 2026
- Conference Registration Opens: May 15, 2026
- Early Bird Closes: June 15, 2026
Registration fees
LMIC = Low- and Middle-Income Countries
FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE MEETING CLICK HERE.
Join our Meeting Workshop: Integrating Patient Preferences into HTA Decision Making
Dr. Simon Fifer
Dr Simon Fifer is a leading health preference researcher with extensive experience applying patient-preference evidence to healthcare decision-making. He has worked closely with academic, industry, and policy stakeholders across multiple countries to translate preference research into real-world impact. Simon co-chairs the HTAi Patient Preference Project Subcommittee and is co-author of Patient Preference Research to Inform HTA, a chapter in the latest edition of Patient Involvement in Health Technology Assessment (Springer, 2026).
Patient-preference evidence is increasingly cited in HTA guidance worldwide, yet how to use it in reimbursement decisions remains inconsistent, and its impact varies by country. This workshop tackles that gap. Simon will explore how evidence on patient preferences can be meaningfully integrated into real-world healthcare decision-making. Drawing on insights from international HTA practices, with a focus on Southeast Asia, participants will gain a practical understanding of how preferences can inform policy, evaluation, and priority setting.
Why Should you Attend?
- Gain practical, real-world insights on applying health preference methods in HTA and policy
- Learn from current research through oral presentations, posters, and case-based discussions
- Engage directly with international and local experts through panels and discussions
- Expand your network via dedicated networking sessions and conference dinner
- Showcase your work, exchange ideas, and build global research collaborations
Q: How are the IAHPR abstracts selected?
A: Overall, the selection process is designed to be uniform, transparent, and member-driven. For each candidate abstract, reviewer ratings and comments are summarized and all identifiers are removed. The mean scoring (5*Superior+3*Good+2*Acceptable-5*Unacceptable) is applied uniformly, inherently ranking the candidate abstracts. Using this ranking, the top abstracts are invited for podium presentations. If the meeting has a poster session, the remaining abstracts with acceptable scores (mean score greater than two) are invited for poster presentation. Alternates to the podiums are promoted if needed. Abstract presentations are arranged by co-chairs.
Q: Do submitters and reviewers receive summary scores and comments?
A: Yes, both submitters and reviewers (i.e., tenured members) receive summary scores and comments regardless of abstract acceptance or rejection. However, abstracts that do not pass the administrative review (i.e., rejected by co-chairs) will have no scores and limited comments.
Q: Can I present multiple abstracts at the same IAHPR meeting?
A: Generally no, each presenter is given a maximum of 1 podium presentation per meeting. However, this rule may be relaxed for students, who might have a podium and a poster presentation at the same meeting. If a presenter has multiple abstracts deemed acceptable for a meeting, the presenter must either (1) decline all but 1 podium presentation or (2) make arrangements for a co-author to present the abstract.
Q: Can I present the same abstract at multiple IAHPR meetings?
A: Generally no, the same abstract may not be presented as a podium presentation at multiple IAHPR meetings. However, this rule may be relaxed for students, who might present their abstract as a poster at one meeting and as a podium at the next meeting, which might be particularly useful to showcase preliminary and final work.
Q: Can more than 1 person present the same abstract at an IAHPR meeting?
A: Poster and podium presentations are selected based on the abstract ratings of the tenured faculty. Symposium presentations are selected by the co-chairs and approved by the Board and tenured faculty. If accepted, each presentation has different requirements. For example, symposium presenters typically participate in panel discussions. Poster presenters may give a brief oral presentation (i.e., elevator talk) as well as respond to questions during the poster session. Unlike poster presentations, symposium and podium presentations count toward tenured membership.