When I applied to the EUPHAnxt Mentoring Programme, I barely knew what Health Technology Assessment (HTA) was. I had encountered the term in lectures but lacked a clear understanding of it. Admitting this in a blog post feels slightly uncomfortable, but it is an important place to start. The purpose of a mentorship is not to show up as an expert. It is to arrive curious and willing to ask the questions that feel too basic.
I was matched with Professor Chiara De Waure, the President of the EUPHA Health Technology Assessment Section. She has spent years analyzing how countries decide which health technologies to fund and how those choices impact communities. Before our first meeting, I wondered how to ask her to start entirely from scratch. Fortunately, our early conversations were exactly what I needed. They were foundational. Professor Chiara De Waure never assumed I already had the vocabulary or the framework. We discussed HTA not as a dictionary definition but as a practical process sitting at the intersection of clinical evidence, economics, ethics and politics. We explored how nations decide whether a new cancer drug, a digital health tool or a vaccine programme is worth adopting. We also discussed the new EU HTA Regulation that came into force in January 2025. This regulation introduces joint clinical assessments for Member States evaluating medicines.
This mentorship did not hand me a career or magically transform me into an HTA expert. Instead, it completely changed how I think about public health. Previously, I viewed public health mostly in terms of interventions like vaccination campaigns, health promotion and disease surveillance. I had never considered the infrastructure behind them. Who decides which vaccine gets funded? What evidence counts and who evaluates it? These are fundamental HTA questions that underpin almost every important public health decision.
Now, when I read about a new treatment being approved or an immunization programme expanding, I find myself asking entirely different questions. I no longer just ask if it works. I ask how we know, what it was compared to, who conducted the assessment and whether the process included patient perspectives. That fundamental shift in perspective is the most valuable outcome of my experience.
If you are thinking about applying for this mentorship program, I highly recommend you do it. You do not need to be an expert in your chosen topic. You simply need genuine curiosity and the willingness to engage honestly.
