ArticleInternational journal of health policy and management2014
Harnessing the potential to quantify public preferences for healthcare priorities through citizens' juries.
Article in International journal of health policy and management, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk-Adapted Breast Screening for Women at Low Predicted Risk of Breast Cancer: An Online Discrete Choice Experiment.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024Article
- Moving beyond the Court of Public Opinion: A Citizens' Jury Exploring the Public's Values around Funding Decisions for Ultra-Orphan Drugs.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Investigating public values in health care priority - Chileans´ preference for national health care.BMC public health · 2021Article
- A virtual deliberative public engagement study on heritable genome editing among South Africans: Study protocol.PloS one · 2021Article
- Creating sustainable health care systems.Journal of health organization and management · 2019Article
- Experience-based utility and own health state valuation for a health state classification system: why and how to do it.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2018Article
- The association between misperceptions around weight status and quality of life in adults in Australia.Health and quality of life outcomes · 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
- Developing a conceptual model for the application of patient and public involvement in the healthcare system in Iran.Electronic physician · 2016Article
- Article
- Prioritising patients for bariatric surgery: building public preferences from a discrete choice experiment into public policy.BMJ open · 2015Article
- Public participation: methods matter; a response to Boaz et al.International journal of health policy and management · 2014Article
- Public participation: more than a method?: Comment on "Harnessing the potential to quantify public preferences for healthcare priorities through citizens' juries".International journal of health policy and management · 2014Article
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
Despite progress towards greater public engagement, questions about the optimal approach to access public preferences remain unanswered. We review two increasingly popular methods for engaging the public in healthcare priority-setting and determining their preferences; the Citizens' Jury (CJ) and Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE). We discuss the theoretical framework from which each method is derived, its application in healthcare, and critique the information it can provide for decision-makers. We conclude that combining deliberation of an informed public via CJs and quantification of preferences using DCE methods, whilst it remains to be tested as an approach to engaging the public in priority-setting, could potentially achieve much richer information than the application of either method in isolation.
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.