Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27358725›Full record

ArticleIsrael journal of health policy research2016

Decision-makers' acquaintance with the public's priorities in health services.

Giora Kaplan, Orna Baron-Epel

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Israel journal of health policy research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Giora KaplanPsychosocial Aspects of Health, The Gertner Institute for Epidemiology and Health Policy Research, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, 52621 Israel.
Orna Baron-EpelSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Social Welfare and Health Studies, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDecision makers often assume they know the public's standpoints and see themselves as capable of representing them. The aim of this study is to assess the level of acquaintance that senior decision-makers in the Israeli health system have concerning the priorities of the public in whose name they act.

methodsA phone survey was conducted with a representative population sample and face-to-face interviews were conducted with senior decision-makers.

resultsThe decision-makers did predict correctly the public's desired level of government involvement in health care; but only some of them correctly predicted the public's preferences on allocation of funds-to health versus other areas. They had difficulty foreseeing public priorities for allocating additional monies to health, and even greater difficulty ascertaining preferences of the public for their own health insurance.

conclusionsGovernment decision-making processes should include evidence about public preferences. The findings of this study indicate that decision makers need to be provided with reliable, systematic information on public preferences.

Indexed as

Consultation with the publicDecision-makers opinionHealth prioritiesHealth rationingPublic opinion

Identifiers

PMID27358725
PMCPMC4926295

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.