ReviewHealth care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy2003
A strategy to improve priority setting in health care institutions.
Review in Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 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
49 citing papers in PubMed.
- A qualitative evaluation of priority-setting by the Health Benefits Package Advisory Panel in Kenya.Health policy and planning · 2023Article
- 'Real-world' priority setting for service improvement in English primary care: a decentred approach.Public management review · 2023Article
- When complexity matters: a step-by-step guide to incorporating a complexity perspective in guideline development for public health and health system interventions.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Review
- Development of the WHO-INTEGRATE evidence-to-decision framework: an overview of systematic reviews of decision criteria for health decision-making.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2020Review
- A systems perspective on the importance of global health strategy developments for accomplishing today's Sustainable Development Goals.Health policy and planning · 2019Review
- Medium-Range Narratives as a Complementary Tool to Principle-Based Prioritization in Sweden: Test Case "ADHD".Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2019Article
- Rationing for medicines by health care providers in Indonesia National Health Insurance System at hospital setting: a qualitative study.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2019Article
- Research and Global Health Emergencies: On the Essential Role of Best Practice.Public health ethics · 2018Article
- An ethical framework for evaluation of public health plans: a systematic process for legitimate and fair decision-making.Public health · 2018Article
- Perspective: Consideration of Values When Setting Priorities in Nutrition Research: Guidance for Transparency.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2018Article
- Priority-setting in health research in Iran: a qualitative study on barriers and facilitators.Health research policy and systems · 2018Article
- Describing and evaluating healthcare priority setting practices at the county level in Kenya.The International journal of health planning and management · 2018Article
- Advancing Germany's new global health strategy.BMJ global health · 2018Article
- Importance of Leadership Style towards Quality of Care Measures in Healthcare Settings: A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017Review
- Setting healthcare priorities: a description and evaluation of the budgeting and planning process in county hospitals in Kenya.Health policy and planning · 2017Article
- The Need for Global Application of the Accountability for Reasonableness Approach to Support Sustainable Outcomes Comment on "Expanded HTA: Enhancing Fairness and Legitimacy".International journal of health policy and management · 2017Article
- Use of the 'Accountability for Reasonableness' Approach to Improve Fairness in Accessing Dialysis in a Middle-Income Country.PloS one · 2016Article
- Who prefers the 'cost-effectiveness ratio' prioritization approach in health-care decisions? Results of an empirical analysis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2015Article
- Setting Healthcare Priorities at the Macro and Meso Levels: A Framework for Evaluation.International journal of health policy and management · 2015Review
- Accountability for reasonableness: the relevance, or not, of exceptionality in resource allocation.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Priority setting (also known as resource allocation or rationing) occurs at every level of every health system and is one of the most significant health care policy questions of the 21st century. Because it is so prevalent and context specific, improving priority setting in a health system entails improving it in the institutions that constitute the system. But, how should this be done? Normative approaches are necessary because they help identify key values that clarify policy choices, but insufficient because different approaches lead to different conclusions and there is no consensus about which ones are correct, and they are too abstract to be directly used in actual decision making. Empirical approaches are necessary because they help to identify what is being done and what can be done, but are insufficient because they cannot identify what should be done. Moreover, to be really helpful, an improvement strategy must utilize rigorous research methods that are able to analyze and capture experience so that past problems are corrected and lessons can be shared with others. Therefore, a constructive, practical and accessible improvement strategy must be research-based and combine both normative and empirical methods. In this paper we propose a research-based improvement strategy that involves combining three linked methods: case study research to describe priority setting; interdisciplinary research to evaluate the description using an ethical framework; and action research to improve priority setting. This describe-evaluate-improve strategy is a generalizable method that can be used in different health care institutions to improve priority setting in that context.
Indexed as
Identifiers
14510309What 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.