PHP139 Which Criteria are Considered in Health Care Decisions? Insights from an International Survey of Policy and Clinical Decision Makers

Tanios, Nataly; Wagner, Monika; Tony, Michèle; Baltussen, Rob; Til, Janine Astrid van; Rindress, Donna; Kind, Paul; Goetghebeur, Mireille

doi:10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.681

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…MCDA appeared superior to direct ranking technologies based on standard HTA reports as it makes explicit consideration of relevant aspects into decision making by encouraging decision makers to think hard about what they value, why they value it, and in what context they value it. These findings are in line with those of Tanios et al (22) on decision-makers’ perceptions of the relevance of a core set of criteria and on the need to consider a wider range of criteria to assist decision making. Also with Guindo et al (23) on the perceived importance of considering both normative and feasibility criteria for fair allocation of resources and optimized decision making.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Testing Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for More Transparent Resource-Allocation Decision Making in Colombia

Jaramillo¹,

Goetghebeur

Moreno-Mattar

2016

Int J Technol Assess Health Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Testing Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for More Transparent Resource-Allocation Decision Making in Colombia

Jaramillo¹,

Goetghebeur

Moreno-Mattar

2016

Int J Technol Assess Health Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This statement is supported by some authors [ 26 ], on the need to consider a wider range of criteria that move from scientific evidence to assist decision-making. It also seems important for decision-makers to agree on a core set of criteria to assist the whole process to make it more predictable and consistent [ 27 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

HTA and MCDA solely or combined? The case of priority-setting in Colombia

Castro

Moreno-Mattar

Rivillas

2018

Cost Eff Resour Alloc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAll healthcare systems face problems of justice and efficiency related to setting priorities for allocating limited financial resources. Therefore, explicit decision-making in healthcare depicted as a continuum from evidence generation to deliberation and communication of the decision made, needs to be transparent and fair. Nevertheless, priority-setting in many parts of the world remains being implicit and ad-hoc process. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) have emerged as policy tools to assist informed decision-making. Both, MCDA and HTA have pros and cons.Main bodyColombia experienced an important institutional transformation after the establishment of the Health Technology Assessment Institute in 2012. This paper briefly presents the current challenges of the Colombian health system, the general features of the new health sector reform, the main characteristics of HTA in Colombia and the potential benefits and caveats of incorporating MCDA approaches into the decision-making process.ConclusionStructured and objective consideration of the factors that are both measurable and value-based in an open and transparent manner may be feasible through combining HTA and MCDA in contexts like Colombia. Further testing and validation of HTA and MCDA solely or combined in LMICs are needed to advance these approaches into healthcare decision-making worldwide.

show abstract

“…The GPS-Health feeds into the international debate about social value judgements [ 59 ] and the use of different criteria for priority setting in health care, in two ways. First, the present guidance can be considered as complementary to published inventories and mapping of all possibly relevant criteria [ 12 , 56 ] as it is based on intense deliberative processes between experts on the relevance of these criteria and ultimately consensus building [ 12 , 60 ]. Second, many countries around the world mention equity-related criteria in their policy frameworks on the reimbursement of health interventions, but these are sometimes ill-defined and not operationalized [ 61 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Guidance on priority setting in health care (GPS-Health): the inclusion of equity criteria not captured by cost-effectiveness analysis

Norheim

Baltussen

Johri

et al. 2014

Cost Eff Resour Alloc

141

145

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This Guidance for Priority Setting in Health Care (GPS-Health), initiated by the World Health Organization, offers a comprehensive map of equity criteria that are relevant to health care priority setting and should be considered in addition to cost-effectiveness analysis. The guidance, in the form of a checklist, is especially targeted at decision makers who set priorities at national and sub-national levels, and those who interpret findings from cost-effectiveness analysis. It is also targeted at researchers conducting cost-effectiveness analysis to improve reporting of their results in the light of these other criteria.The guidance was develop through a series of expert consultation meetings and involved three steps: i) methods and normative concepts were identified through a systematic review; ii) the review findings were critically assessed in the expert consultation meetings which resulted in a draft checklist of normative criteria; iii) the checklist was validated though an extensive hearing process with input from a range of relevant stakeholders.The GPS-Health incorporates criteria related to the disease an intervention targets (severity of disease, capacity to benefit, and past health loss); characteristics of social groups an intervention targets (socioeconomic status, area of living, gender; race, ethnicity, religion and sexual orientation); and non-health consequences of an intervention (financial protection, economic productivity, and care for others).

show abstract

PHP139 Which Criteria are Considered in Health Care Decisions? Insights from an International Survey of Policy and Clinical Decision Makers

Abstract: restraints and objections about the viability of the fund are still a matter of debate, focused particular on the development of a flexible mechanism for primary health care that will ensure equitable access and benefits for members and improve the quality of services.

Cited by 3 publications

References 25 publications

Testing Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for More Transparent Resource-Allocation Decision Making in Colombia

Testing Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for More Transparent Resource-Allocation Decision Making in Colombia

HTA and MCDA solely or combined? The case of priority-setting in Colombia

Guidance on priority setting in health care (GPS-Health): the inclusion of equity criteria not captured by cost-effectiveness analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About