ArticleBMC health services research2010
Evaluating priority setting success in healthcare: a pilot study.
Article in BMC health services research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Priority setting and equity in COVID-19 pandemic plans: a comparative analysis of 18 African countries.Health policy and planning · 2022Article
- Priority setting for maternal, newborn and child health in Uganda: a qualitative study evaluating actual practice.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Assessing and Improving Performance: A Longitudinal Evaluation of Priority Setting and Resource Allocation in a Canadian Health Region.International journal of health policy and management · 2018Article
- Based Real Time Remote Health Monitoring Systems: A Review on Patients Prioritization and Related "Big Data" Using Body Sensors information and Communication Technology.Journal of medical systems · 2017Article
- International validation of quality indicators for evaluating priority setting in low income countries: process and key lessons.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Resource allocation criteria in a hospital.Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2017Article
- Citizens' preferences on healthcare expenditure allocation: evidence from Greece.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2016Article
- Investigating client perception and attitude to decentralization of HIV/AIDS treatment services to primary health centres in three Nigerian states.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2016Article
- Criteria for Drug Reimbursement Decision-Making: An Emerging Public Health Challenge in Bulgaria.Balkan medical journal · 2016Article
- Setting Healthcare Priorities at the Macro and Meso Levels: A Framework for Evaluation.International journal of health policy and management · 2015Review
- Communicable Diseases Prioritized According to Their Public Health Relevance, Sweden, 2013.PloS one · 2015Article
- The disease burden of hepatitis B, influenza, measles and salmonellosis in Germany: first results of the burden of communicable diseases in Europe study.Epidemiology and infection · 2014Article
- Decision maker perceptions of resource allocation processes in Canadian health care organizations: a national survey.BMC health services research · 2013Article
- Prioritizing strategies for comprehensive liver cancer control in Asia: a conjoint analysis.BMC health services research · 2012Article
- Decision-making in healthcare: a practical application of partial least square path modelling to coverage of newborn screening programmes.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2012Article
- Facilitating comparative effectiveness research in cancer genomics: evaluating stakeholder perceptions of the engagement process.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2012Article
- Research priorities in the field of HIV and AIDS in Iran.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn healthcare today, decisions are made in the face of serious resource constraints. Healthcare managers are struggling to provide high quality care, manage resources effectively, and meet changing patient needs. Healthcare managers who are constantly making difficult resource decisions desire a way to improve their priority setting processes. Despite the wealth of existing priority setting literature (for example, program budgeting and marginal analysis, accountability for reasonableness, the 'describe-evaluate-improve' strategy) there are still no tools to evaluate how healthcare resources are prioritised. This paper describes the development and piloting of a process to evaluate priority setting in health institutions. The evaluation process was designed to examine the procedural and substantive dimensions of priority setting using a multi-methods approach, including a staff survey, decision-maker interviews, and document analysis.
methodsThe evaluation process was piloted in a mid-size community hospital in Ontario, Canada while its leaders worked through their annual budgeting process. Both qualitative and quantitative methods were used to analyze the data.
resultsThe evaluation process was both applicable to the context and it captured the budgeting process. In general, the pilot test provided support for our evaluation process and our definition of success, (i.e., our conceptual framework).
conclusionsThe purpose of the evaluation process is to provide a simple, practical way for an organization to better understand what it means to achieve success in its priority setting activities and identify areas for improvement. In order for the process to be used by healthcare managers today, modification and contextualization of the process are anticipated. As the evaluation process is applied in more health care organizations or applied repeatedly in an organization, it may become more streamlined.
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.