ArticleBMC health services research2012
Health care priority setting in Norway a multicriteria decision analysis.
Article in BMC health services research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 5 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Systematic Review of the Relative Social Value of Child and Adult Health.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Pooled it
- Multi-criteria Decision Analysis Software in Healthcare Priority Setting: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2020Pooled it
- Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) in health care: a systematic review of the main characteristics and methodological steps.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2018Pooled it
- 'Real-world' health care priority setting using explicit decision criteria: a systematic review of the literature.BMC health services research · 2015Pooled it
- Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature.PharmacoEconomics · 2014Pooled it
- Can medical consortiums bridge the gap in health inequity in China? A propensity score matching analysis.Health policy and planning · 2025Article
- Health Risk and the Value of Life.Journal of public economics · 2025Article
- The digitalization of emergency department triage: the perspectives of health professionals and patients.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Priority setting in the German healthcare system: results from a discrete choice experiment.International journal of health economics and management · 2023Article
- Multi-criteria decision-making methods applied in health-insurance underwriting.Health systems (Basingstoke, England) · 2023Article
- Development of attributes and levels of mental health insurance services using a discrete choice experiment.Journal of education and health promotion · 2023Article
- Attitudes towards priority setting in the norwegian health care system: a general population survey.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Public participation: healthcare rationing in the newspaper media.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Describing practices of priority setting and resource allocation in publicly funded health care systems of high-income countries.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Practices of decision making in priority setting and resource allocation: a scoping review and narrative synthesis of existing frameworks.Health economics review · 2021Article
- A Multiple Stakeholder Multicriteria Decision Analysis in Diabetic Macular Edema Management: The MULTIDEX-EMD Study.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2020Article
- Health insurance benefit package in Iran: a qualitative policy process analysis.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- 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
- 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
- Exploring the challenges of the Iranian parliament about passing laws for resource allocation in healthcare: a qualitative study.Electronic physician · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPriority setting in population health is increasingly based on explicitly formulated values. The Patients Rights Act of the Norwegian tax-based health service guaranties all citizens health care in case of a severe illness, a proven health benefit, and proportionality between need and treatment. This study compares the values of the country's health policy makers with these three official principles.
methodsIn total 34 policy makers participated in a discrete choice experiment, weighting the relative value of six policy criteria. We used multi-variate logistic regression with selection as dependent valuable to derive odds ratios for each criterion. Next, we constructed a composite league table - based on the sum score for the probability of selection - to rank potential interventions in five major disease areas.
resultsThe group considered cost effectiveness, large individual benefits and severity of disease as the most important criteria in decision making. Priority interventions are those related to cardiovascular diseases and respiratory diseases. Less attractive interventions rank those related to mental health.
conclusionsNorwegian policy makers' values are in agreement with principles formulated in national health laws. Multi-criteria decision approaches may provide a tool to support explicit allocation decisions.
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.