ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2006
Developing a prioritisation framework in an English Primary Care Trust.
Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Multi-criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment: addressing methodological challenges to improve the state of the art.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2019Pooled it
- Balancing costs and benefits at different stages of medical innovation: a systematic review of Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA).BMC health services research · 2015Pooled it
- 'Real-world' health care priority setting using explicit decision criteria: a systematic review of the literature.BMC health services research · 2015Pooled it
- Priority setting in critical care: a multicriteria approach to ranking access to Intensive Care Unit beds.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Ethical Resource Allocation in Policing: Why Policing Requires a Different Approach from Healthcare.Criminal justice ethics · 2024Article
- Organizational aspect in healthcare decision-making: a literature review.Journal of market access & health policy · 2020Review
- Determining the Value of Two Biologic Drugs for Chronic Inflammatory Skin Diseases: Results of a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2018Article
- The challenge of obtaining information necessary for multi-criteria decision analysis implementation: the case of physiotherapy services in Canada.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2013Article
- Estimating cost-effectiveness in public health: a summary of modelling and valuation methods.Health economics review · 2012Article
- From efficacy to equity: Literature review of decision criteria for resource allocation and healthcare decisionmaking.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2012Article
- Managing resources in NHS dentistry: using health economics to inform commissioning decisions.BMC health services research · 2011Article
- Quantifying the impact and relevance of scientific research.PloS one · 2011Article
- Article
- Prioritizing policy interventions to improve diets? Will it work, can it happen, will it do harm?Health promotion international · 2010Article
- Evidence and Value: Impact on DEcisionMaking--the EVIDEM framework and potential applications.BMC health services research · 2008Review
- Individual and societal effects of mental disorders on earnings in the United States: results from the national comorbidity survey replication.The American journal of psychiatry · 2008Article
- 6-STEPPPs: A Modular Tool to Facilitate Clinician Participation in Fair Decisions for Funding New Cancer Drugs.Journal of oncology practice · 2008Article
- Priority setting of health interventions: the need for multi-criteria decision analysis.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the English NHS, Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) are required to commission health services, to maximise the well-being of the population, subject to the available budget. There are numerous techniques employed to make decisions, some more rational and transparent than others. A weighted benefit score can be used to rank options but this does not take into account value for money from investments.
methodsWe developed a weighted benefit score framework for use in an English PCT which ranked options in order of 'cost-value' or 'cost per point of benefit'. Our method differs from existing techniques by explicitly combining cost and a composite weighted benefit score into the cost-value ratio.
resultsThe technique proved readily workable, and was able to accommodate a wide variety of data and competing criteria. Participants felt able to assign scores to proposed services, and generate a ranked list, which provides a solid starting point for the PCT Board to discuss and make funding decisions. Limitations included potential for criteria to be neither exhaustive nor mutually exclusive and the lack of an interval property in the benefit score limiting the usefulness of a cost-value ratio.
conclusionA technical approach to decision making is insufficient for making prioritisation decisions, however our technique provides a very valuable, structured and informed starting point for PCT decision making.
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.