ArticleJournal of epidemiology and community health2000
Setting health priorities in a Swiss canton: what do different methods tell us?
Article in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating Equity in Topic Selection for Orphan Medicinal Products: Policy Implications for Health Technology Assessment in Rare Diseases.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Review
- A systematic review of operational research modelling for alcohol consumption and its consequences.Health systems (Basingstoke, England) · 2026Review
- Prioritisation processes for programme implementation and evaluation in public health: A scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Health Priorities in French-Speaking Swiss Cantons.International journal of health policy and management · 2018Article
- Article
- Metodologías para la priorización en investigación en salud: una revisión sistemática de la literatura.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2017Article
- A priority health index identifies the top six priority risk and related factors for non-communicable diseases in Brazilian cities.BMC public health · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectiveDespite excellent mortality indicators, there is clear evidence that the health status of the population of Geneva could be improved if more attention and resources were devoted to prevention strategies. To identify a set of robust health priorities an original approach was used triangulating results between three methods.
methodsThe study calculated potential years of life lost, disability adjusted years of life lost, and conducted a Delphi survey to gather the opinion of health professionals and the general public. MAIN
resultsSeveral health conditions were unanimously selected by all three methods as top priorities: cardiovascular diseases, AIDS, respiratory cancer, breast cancer for women, suicide and traffic accidents. In addition, two determinants-alcohol abuse and tobacco abuse-for which a clear conceptual link could be established between all methods were chosen. Connections between priorities identified through the DALY and the Delphi method lead to further inclusion of chronic back pain and depression. Some issues solely identified through the Delphi survey were included as they were consistently considered important by professionals and the lay public alike-violence in the family, unemployment, social exclusion.
conclusionsThese results indicate that health priorities, and by extension health care priorities, would benefit from using a mix of quantitative and qualitative research methods. The triangulation of results allows for a broader perspective and makes results more acceptable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.