Public attitudes and values in priority setting

Peacock, Stuart

doi:10.1186/s13584-015-0025-8

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Deliberation is a key part of the EDP and is used in steps 2–6 . A plenary discussion was chosen as the deliberation technique based on the evaluation of the previous strategic planning process, which revealed that in the Indonesian culture, it is inappropriate to use voting .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translating international HIV treatment guidelines into local priorities in Indonesia

Tromp

Prawiranegara

Siregar

et al. 2018

Tropical Med Int Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstractobjective International guidelines recommend countries to expand antiretroviral therapy (ART) to all HIV-infected individuals and establish local-level priorities in relation to other treatment, prevention and mitigation interventions through fair processes. However, no practical guidance is provided for such priority-setting processes. Evidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs) fill this gap and combine stakeholder deliberation to incorporate relevant social values with rational decisionmaking informed by evidence on these values. This study reports on the first-time implementation and evaluation of an EDP in HIV control, organised to support the AIDS Commission in West Java province, Indonesia, in the development of its strategic plan for 2014-2018.methods Under the responsibility of the provincial AIDS Commission, an EDP was implemented to select priority interventions using six steps: (i) situational analysis; (ii) formation of a multistakeholder Consultation Panel; (iii) selection of criteria; (iv) identification and assessment of interventions' performance; (v) deliberation; and (vi) selection of funding and implementing institutions. An independent researcher conducted in-depth interviews (n = 21) with panel members to evaluate the process.results The Consultation Panel included 23 stakeholders. They identified 50 interventions and these were evaluated against four criteria: impact on the epidemic, stigma reduction, cost-effectiveness and universal coverage. After a deliberative discussion, the Consultation Panel prioritised a combination of several treatment, prevention and mitigation interventions.conclusion The EDP improved both stakeholder involvement and the evidence base for the strategic planning process. EDPs fill an important gap which international guidelines and current tools for strategic planning in HIV control leave unaddressed.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translating international HIV treatment guidelines into local priorities in Indonesia

Tromp

Prawiranegara

Siregar

et al. 2018

Tropical Med Int Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…members from the planning department), and citizens (representatives from business and residents) to deliberate and develop a mutual belief on what the community values. The process can be roughly divided into three steps (following similar ideas in [36]):…”

Section: Phase I: Public Value and Priority Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collective Opinion Formation for Public Decision Making in Local Governments

Tian¹,

Cai²

2016

Proceedings of the 17th International Digital Government Research Conference on Digital Government Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Democratic decision making on public issues requires that a collective form of public opinion be constructed in order to be legitimate. However, elicitation of collective public opinion has been challenging due to conceptual and methodological difficulties as well as practical constraints. This paper revisits existing methods of civic engagement through the lens of structured public decision making, and reveals the disconnects between methods of public opinion and the need for establishing public value and solid decision analysis in democratic decision making. This explains why the current online deliberation systems fail to support formation of decisionrelevant public opinions. Based on such understanding, we propose Community Opinion Elicitation (COPE) as a solution to public engagement in local government decision making. COPE envisions a three-phase process where opinions from the general public are elicited (Phase III) only after public values and solid decision analysis have been established (Phases I and II). In practice, COPE is implemented by extending traditional online deliberation with two smallgroup deliberations that address public value identification and decision analysis. This process has been deployed by State College municipal government as a formal method to engage the public. We report our findings from such field exercises and their implications to scaling up online deliberation for public decision making.

show abstract

“…In a democracy, these political dimensions require engaging community-level decisions around shared values and preferences (5,(9)(10)(11). Engaging citizens directly in these decision-making processes strengthens legitimacy, transparency, and accountability, which in turn increases the public's sense of ownership in the policy and trust in the related outcomes (12,13). Since the late 1980s, many governments have recognized and begun to operationalize the notion that priority setting should incorporate, or primarily rely on community preferences that can be analyzed alongside technical data (14).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating Public Values in Health Care Priority – Chileans´ Preference for National Health Care

Núñez

Chi

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: This study aims to assess preferences and values for priority setting in healthcare in Chile through an original and innovative survey method. Based on the answers from a previous survey that look into the barriers the Chilean population face, this study considers the preferences of the communities overcoming those barriers. As a result six programs were identified: (1) new infrastructure, (2) better healthcare coverage, (3) increasing physicians/specialists, (4) new informatics systems, (5) new awareness healthcare programs, and (6) improving availability of drugs. Methods: We applied an innovative survey method for sample subjects to prioritize these programs by their opinion and by allocating resources. The survey also asked people´s preferences for a distributive justice principle for healthcare to guide priority setting of services in Chile. The survey was conducted with a sample of 1,142 individuals. Results: More than half of the interviewees (56.4%) indicated a single program as their first priority, while 20.1% selected two of them as their first priority. To increase the number of doctors/specialists and improve patient-doctor communication was the program that obtained the highest priority. The second and third priorities correspond to improving and investing in infrastructure and expanding the coverage of healthcare insurances. Additionally, the results showed that equal access for equal healthcare is the principle selected by the majority to guide distributive justice for the Chilean health system. Conclusions: This study shade lights on how a large population sample can participate in major decision making of national health policies, including making a choice of a distributive justice principle. Despite the complexity of the questions asked, this study demonstrated that with an innovative method and adequate guidance, average population is capable of engaging in expressing their preferences and values. Results of this study provide policy-makers useful community generated information for prioritizing policies to improve healthcare access.

show abstract

Public attitudes and values in priority setting

Cited by 10 publications

References 21 publications

Translating international HIV treatment guidelines into local priorities in Indonesia

Translating international HIV treatment guidelines into local priorities in Indonesia

Collective Opinion Formation for Public Decision Making in Local Governments

Investigating Public Values in Health Care Priority – Chileans´ Preference for National Health Care

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About