ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2008
Priority setting in health care: Lessons from the experiences of eight countries.
Article in International journal for equity in health, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 99 papers, 6 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
99 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A review of appropriate indicators for need-based financial resource allocation in health systems.BMC health services research · 2021Pooled it
- Social values and health systems in health policy and systems research: a mixed-method systematic review and evidence map.Health policy and planning · 2020Pooled it
- Multi-criteria Decision Analysis Software in Healthcare Priority Setting: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2020Pooled it
- Cost and cost-effectiveness of childhood cancer treatment in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review.BMJ global health · 2019Pooled it
- The humanistic and economic burden of juvenile idiopathic arthritis in the era of biologic medication.Current rheumatology reports · 2015Pooled it
- A systematic review of stated preference studies reporting public preferences for healthcare priority setting.The patient · 2014Pooled it
- Citizen participation in patient prioritization policy decisions: an empirical and experimental study on patients' characteristics.PloS one · 2012Trial
- The Moral Justifications of Disability Discrimination in Health Care Allocation: An Experimental Assessment.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026Article
- Prioritising time for communication in healthcare-a normative analysis.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2026Article
- Priority-Setting and Values: A Qualitative Study of the Danish Medicines Council.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
- Department managers' perceptions of a priority-setting model in a local healthcare organisation: a mixed-methods study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Polarity in healthcare priority setting: a comparative analysis of attitudes among Finnish physicians, dentists, MPs, and citizens.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Priority Setting in the Context of Planetary Healthcare.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Review
- Balancing competing rationales in priority-setting in primary healthcare - an interview study on political governance.Journal of health organization and management · 2025Article
- The ethical canary: narrow reflective equilibrium as a source of moral justification in healthcare priority-setting.Journal of medical ethics · 2024Article
- Equity considerations for the implementation of health insurance benefit package in Ethiopia: result of expert Delphi exercise.International journal for equity in health · 2024Article
- Identifying health and healthcare priorities in rural areas: A concept mapping study informed by consumers, health professionals and researchers.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- Article
- Perceptions of the seriousness of major public health problems during the COVID-19 pandemic in seven middle-income countries.Communications medicine · 2023Article
- Priority setting in the German healthcare system: results from a discrete choice experiment.International journal of health economics and management · 2023Article
39 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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
All health care systems face problems of justice and efficiency related to setting priorities for allocating a limited pool of resources to a population. Because many of the central issues are the same in all systems, the United States and other countries can learn from the successes and failures of countries that have explicitly addressed the question of health care priorities.We review explicit priority setting efforts in Norway, Sweden, Israel, the Netherlands, Denmark, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the state of Oregon in the US. The approaches used can be divided into those centered on outlining principles versus those that define practices. In order to establish the main lessons from their experiences we consider (1) the process each country used, (2) criteria to judge the success of these efforts, (3) which approaches seem to have met these criteria, and (4) using their successes and failures as a guide, how to proceed in setting priorities. We demonstrate that there is little evidence that establishment of a values framework for priority setting has had any effect on health policy, nor is there evidence that priority setting exercises have led to the envisaged ideal of an open and participatory public involvement in 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.