It is widely recognized that the incorporation of patient and public perspectives can enrich health policy decision-making. Methodological and practical advice on engaging patients and the public has proliferated in recent years, with many health technology assessment (HTA) agencies working to formalize their processes in this area. However, despite growing enthusiasm for patient and public engagement, many ethical issues remain unaddressed including: balancing risks and benefits to participants; recruitment methods; reimbursement for time spent participating; representation; and, information disclosure.

In this critical analysis, we draw on our collective experiences engaging with patients and public in the context of HTA. We use principles from two theories, i) research ethics, and ii) participatory governance, to analyze these challenges. The purpose of this analysis is to explore the ways in which risks and benefits to patient and public participants might be balanced in HTA activities.

We begin by describing some ethically challenging experiences we have faced when soliciting views and values from patients and members of the public, some anticipated and some unexpected. These challenges include unexpected disclosures of information, navigating power differentials when working with vulnerable populations, eliciting information about potentially traumatizing experiences, and fairly representing controversial and conflicting opinions. We offer examples about what types of patient engagement activities may subject participants to unreasonable risk, and suggest some guiding principles to help plan ethical patient and public engagement activities.

Patient and public engagement requires more than just procedural methodological expertise- it also requires the ability to identify and analyze relevant ethical issues. We posit that health technology assessors have a moral obligation to ensure that the risks of patient and public engagement activities do not outweigh the benefits. We call upon the HTA community to engage in thoughtful deliberation about what can be learned from experiences within HTA and in other contexts.