ArticleHealth research policy and systems2012
Multi-criteria decision analysis for setting priorities on HIV/AIDS interventions in Thailand.
Article in Health research policy and systems, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.
- The relative importance of severity and rarity criteria in health resource allocation: an umbrella review.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024Pooled it
- Community participation and stakeholder engagement in determining health service coverage: A systematic review and framework synthesis to assess effectiveness.Journal of global health · 2023Pooled it
- Application of multicriteria decision analysis in health care: a systematic review and bibliometric analysis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2015Pooled 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
- The use of deliberative dialogue in health services research: a scoping review.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Review
- Stakeholder priorities for ART initiation and early retention strategies in Malawi: a qualitative study comparing international and national perspectives.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Stakeholder Priorities for ART Initiation and Early Retention Interventions in Malawi: A Qualitative Study Comparing International and National Perspectives.Research square · 2023Article
- Prioritizing population-based nutrition-related interventions to prevent and control hypertension in Iran: a multi-criteria decision-making approach.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Review
- Article
- Operational research: A multidisciplinary approach for the management of infectious disease in a global context.European journal of operational research · 2021Article
- Assessing the Value of Nusinersen for Spinal Muscular Atrophy: A Comparative Analysis of Reimbursement Submission and Appraisal in European Countries.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
- A Multiple Stakeholder Multicriteria Decision Analysis in Diabetic Macular Edema Management: The MULTIDEX-EMD Study.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2020Article
- Assessment and prioritization of the WHO "best buys" and other recommended interventions for the prevention and control of non-communicable diseases in Iran.BMC public health · 2020Article
- Legislating for public accountability in universal health coverage, Thailand.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2020Article
- Using co-creation and multi-criteria decision analysis to close service gaps for underserved populations.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019Article
- Moving Towards Accountability for Reasonableness - A Systematic Exploration of the Features of Legitimate Healthcare Coverage Decision-Making Processes Using Rare Diseases and Regenerative Therapies as a Case Study.International journal of health policy and management · 2019Article
- Decision-making criteria for medicine reimbursement in Slovenia: an expert panel discussion.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- Incorporating MCDA into HTA: challenges and potential solutions, with a focus on lower income settings.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2018Review
- Stakeholder involvement in Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA wide range of preventive, treatment, and care programs for HIV/AIDS are currently available and some of them have been implemented in Thailand. Policy makers are now facing challenges on how the scarce resources for HIV/AIDS control can be spent more wisely. Although effectiveness and cost-effectiveness information is useful for guiding policy decisions, empirical evidence indicates the importance of other criteria, such as equity and the characteristics of the target population, also play important roles in priority setting. This study aims to experiment with the use of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to prioritise interventions in HIV/AIDS control in Thailand.
methodsWe used MCDA to rank 40 HIV/AIDS interventions on the basis of the priority setting criteria put forward by three groups of stakeholders including policy makers, people living with HIV/AIDs (PLWHA), and village health volunteers (VHVs). MCDA incorporated an explicit component of deliberation to let stakeholders reflect on the rank ordering, and adapt where necessary.
resultsUpon deliberation, policy makers expressed a preference for programs that target high risk groups such as men who have sex with men, injecting drug users, and female sex workers. The VHVs preferred interventions that target the youth or the general population, and gave lower priority to programs that target high risk groups. PLWHA gave all interventions the same priority. The rank order correlation between the priorities as expressed before and after deliberation was 37% among the policy makers and 46% among the VHVs.
conclusionThis study documented the feasibility of MCDA to prioritize HIV/AIDS interventions in Thailand, and has shown the usefulness of a deliberative process as an integrated component of MCDA. MCDA holds potential to contribute to a more transparent and accountable priority setting process, and further application of this approach in the prioritisation of health interventions is warranted.
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.