首页> 外文期刊>Health policy >Understanding what matters: An exploratory study to investigate the views of the general public for priority setting criteria in health care
【24h】

Understanding what matters: An exploratory study to investigate the views of the general public for priority setting criteria in health care

机译:了解重要的是:一个探索性研究,调查一般公众的优先事项在医疗保健标准中的意见

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Health care policy makers internationally are increasingly expressing commitment to consultation with, and incorporation of, the views of the general public into the formulation of health policy and the process of setting health care priorities. In practice, however, there are relatively few opportunities for the general public to be involved in health care decision-making. In making resource allocation decisions, funders, tasked with managing scarce health care resources, are often faced with difficult decisions in balancing efficiency with equity considerations. A mixed methods (qualitative and quantitative) approach incorporating focus group discussions and a ranking exercise was utilised to develop a comprehensive list of potential criteria for setting priorities in health care formulated from the perspective of members of the general public in Australia. A strong level of congruence was found in terms of the rankings of the key criteria with the size of the health gain, clinical effectiveness, and the ability to provide quality of life improvements identified consistently as the three most important criteria for prioritising the funding of an intervention. Findings from this study will be incorporated into a novel DCE framework to explore how decision makers and members of the general public prioritize and trade off different types of health gain and to quantify the weights attached to specific efficiency and equity criteria in the priority setting process. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
机译:卫生保健政策制定者正在越来越越来越多地表达与将军的意见进行协商,并将公众纳入卫生政策的制定和制定医疗保健优先事项的过程。然而,在实践中,公众参与医疗保健决策的机会相对较少。在制定资源分配决策时,资助者,负责管理稀缺的保健资源,通常面临良好的效率考虑效率。利用浓度组讨论的混合方法(定性和定量和定量)方法和排名锻炼,制定普遍列出,以便从澳大利亚公众成员的角度制定的保健优先级的潜在标准。在卫生收益规模,临床效果规模的关键标准的排名方面发现了强大的一致性,以及提供始终如一的生活质量改善的能力,作为优先考虑资金资金的三个最重要标准干涉。本研究的调查结果将被纳入一个新的DCE框架,探讨决策者和一般公众的成员如何优先考虑和履行不同类型的健康收益,并在优先设定过程中量化附着在特定效率和公平标准的权重。 (c)2017 Elsevier B.v.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号