Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26994711›Full record

ArticleThe Milbank quarterly2016

Strategic Planning in Population Health and Public Health Practice: A Call to Action for Higher Education.

Charles Phelps, Guruprasad Madhavan, Rino Rappuoli, Scott Levin, Edward Shortliffe, Rita Colwell

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Milbank quarterly, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Evaluating Frameworks That Provide Value Measures for Health Care Interventions.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2017
    Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Charles PhelpsUniversity of Rochester.
Guruprasad MadhavanNational Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
Rino RappuoliGlaxoSmithKline Vaccines.
Scott LevinJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine.
Edward ShortliffeArizona State University, Columbia University, and Weill Cornell Medical College.
Rita ColwellJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and University of Maryland, College Park.
Johns Hopkins University · USArizona State University · USGlaxoSmithKline (United States) · USNational Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine · USUniversity of Rochester · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

policy pointsScarce resources, especially in population health and public health practice, underlie the importance of strategic planning. Public health agencies' current planning and priority setting efforts are often narrow, at times opaque, and focused on single metrics such as cost-effectiveness. As demonstrated by SMART Vaccines, a decision support software system developed by the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Engineering, new approaches to strategic planning allow the formal incorporation of multiple stakeholder views and multicriteria decision making that surpass even those sophisticated cost-effectiveness analyses widely recommended and used for public health planning. Institutions of higher education can and should respond by building on modern strategic planning tools as they teach their students how to improve population health and public health practice. CONTEXT: Strategic planning in population health and public health practice often uses single indicators of success or, when using multiple indicators, provides no mechanism for coherently combining the assessments. Cost-effectiveness analysis, the most complex strategic planning tool commonly applied in public health, uses only a single metric to evaluate programmatic choices, even though other factors often influence actual decisions.

methodsOur work employed a multicriteria systems analysis approach--specifically, multiattribute utility theory--to assist in strategic planning and priority setting in a particular area of health care (vaccines), thereby moving beyond the traditional cost-effectiveness analysis approach.

findings(1) Multicriteria systems analysis provides more flexibility, transparency, and clarity in decision support for public health issues compared with cost-effectiveness analysis. (2) More sophisticated systems-level analyses will become increasingly important to public health as disease burdens increase and the resources to deal with them become scarcer.

conclusionsThe teaching of strategic planning in public health must be expanded in order to fill a void in the profession's planning capabilities. Public health training should actively incorporate model building, promote the interactive use of software tools, and explore planning approaches that transcend restrictive assumptions of cost-effectiveness analysis. The Strategic Multi-Attribute Ranking Tool for Vaccines (SMART Vaccines), which was recently developed by the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Engineering to help prioritize new vaccine development, is a working example of systems analysis as a basis for decision support.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesCost-Benefit AnalysisData AccuracyEducation, Public Health ProfessionalHealth PlanningHumansPublic Health PracticeQuality-Adjusted Life YearsSchools, Public HealthVaccinesVaccinescost-effectivenesspopulation healthpublic health practicesystems analysis

Identifiers

PMID26994711
PMCPMC4941964
OpenAlexW2299249612

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.