ArticleCommunications medicine2025
A case study integrating scenario thinking with dialysis policymaking in Thailand.
Article in Communications medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHealthcare policymaking often struggles to account for complex future uncertainties, particularly for policies affecting healthcare infrastructure or stakeholder behaviour. Scenario thinking is a structured approach for exploring multiple plausible futures. It has, however, been underutilised in healthcare policymaking. We applied scenario thinking to the 2024 dialysis policy in Thailand to guide policymaking under future uncertainty.
methodsOur study is composed of three parts: scenario development, policy analysis, and evaluation of scenario thinking in the policy process. We developed future scenarios using the intuitive logics method, which systematically identifies and explores key uncertainties, and the critical scenario method to evaluate stakeholder responses. Policy options were evaluated for their robustness across future scenarios. We assessed the overall approach according to fitness-for-purpose, influence, and efficiency indicators from established evaluation frameworks for health technology assessment.
resultsFour scenarios are presented along the dimensions of kidney transplant accessibility and skilled workforce availability. Approval of patients prior to dialysis initiation and a quality monitoring system can strengthen the dialysis programme's adaptability to future change, while considerable uncertainty exists regarding performance of service provider payment mechanisms. Our evaluation suggests that scenario thinking is an efficient method to characterise future uncertainty within available resources for policymaking.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates how scenario thinking can systematically evaluate healthcare policies under future uncertainty, providing a framework for more robust policies. Further research is needed to facilitate its use, building on the adaptations developed in this study to bridge scenario thinking with established processes and standards for healthcare policy.
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.