Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38707776›Full record

ArticleRevista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health2024

Prioritization criteria in policies and management of human resources for health: a proposal for a validated methodology.

Ana Paula Cavalcante de Oliveira, Ana Beatriz Zanardo Mion, Helen Fernanda Barbosa Batista, Mariana Lopes Galante, María Isabel Duré, Isabel Craveiro, Silvana Martins Mishima, Mónica Padilla, Ana Maria Laus, Carla Aparecida Arena Ventura

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Ana Paula Cavalcante de OliveiraUniversidade de São Paulo Ribeirão Preto Brazil Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
Ana Beatriz Zanardo MionUniversidade de São Paulo Ribeirão Preto Brazil Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
Helen Fernanda Barbosa BatistaUniversidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro Rio de Janeiro Brazil Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Mariana Lopes GalanteUniversidade de São Paulo Ribeirão Preto Brazil Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
María Isabel DuréPan American Health Organization Buenos Aires Argentina Pan American Health Organization, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Isabel CraveiroGlobal Health and Tropical Medicine Instituto de Higiene e Medicina Tropical Universidade Nova de Lisboa Lisbon Portugal Global Health and Tropical Medicine, Instituto de Higiene e Medicina Tropical, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Silvana Martins MishimaUniversidade de São Paulo Ribeirão Preto Brazil Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
Mónica PadillaPan American Health Organization Brasilia Brazil Pan American Health Organization, Brasilia, Brazil.
Ana Maria LausUniversidade de São Paulo Ribeirão Preto Brazil Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
Carla Aparecida Arena VenturaUniversidade de São Paulo Ribeirão Preto Brazil Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To create and validate criteria for prioritizing problems related to policies and management of the health workforce. Methods: This methodological study was divided into three stages. First, the criteria were elaborated by means of a systematized literature review. Second, the criteria were evaluated online by a committee of judges comprised of eight specialists. In the third stage, an evaluation was carried out by the target audience in a hybrid workshop. The participants evaluated the material using the Suitability Assessment of Materials instrument, adapted for the research. Results: Three prioritization criteria (relevance, window of opportunity and acceptability) and a scoring scale were developed based on the literature review. In the evaluation by the committee of judges, the approval percentage of the criteria and prioritization method was 84%. Modifications were made based on suggestions in relation to the material presented to the specialists. In the pre-test stage, the approval percentage varied by item, with six of them reaching a maximum approval of 100% (corresponding to approximately 46% of the items), four reaching 92% and three achieving 83% each, indicating positive results. Conclusions: The developed criteria were considered valid for use in the context of policies and management in the area of human resources for health.

Indexed as

health managementhealth policyhealth priority agendaHealth workforcevalidation study

Identifiers

PMID38707776
PMCPMC11069325

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.