A²I™ Device Equity
All three device funding bodies treat equity evidence as a distinct, non-negotiable gate — separate from clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence. Absent equity evidence can block or condition access even when overall efficacy evidence is acceptable.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, rural and remote populations
MSAC requires explicit consideration of access for these populations in every device submission. Where the condition has disproportionate burden in these populations, equity evidence is weighted heavily in the funding decision.
Protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 — age, sex, disability, ethnicity, and others
NICE requires an equality impact assessment demonstrating the technology's impact on protected characteristics has been considered. Missing assessments are a compliance gap that delays or blocks appraisal.
Māori and Pacific peoples
Under Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations, PHARMAC requires explicit consideration of equity impact for Māori and Pacific peoples. Absent equity evidence can block funded access or generate binding conditions.
MSAC requires explicit consideration of access for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and rural/remote populations. Applications that do not address equity of access are flagged, weighted heavily where the condition has disproportionate burden in these populations.
Under the Equality Act 2010, NICE requires applicants to demonstrate consideration of impact on protected characteristics (age, sex, disability, ethnicity, etc). Missing equality impact assessments are a compliance gap that delays or blocks appraisal.
Under Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations, PHARMAC requires explicit consideration of equity impact for Māori and Pacific peoples. Absent equity evidence can block funded access or generate binding conditions, consistent with the pattern seen across PHARMAC's pharmaceutical decisions.
Looking for the full corpus, including comparator, endpoint, and economic model patterns? Explore the full device corpus →