Priority-setting and hospital strategic planning: A qualitative case study

Journal of Health Services Research and Policy

Volumn 8, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 197-201

  Martin, Douglas K ^a   Shulman, Ken ^a,b   Santiago Sorrell, Patricia ^b   Singer, Peter ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b SUNNYBROOK RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HEALTH SERVICES;

ARTICLE; CASE STUDY; DECISION MAKING; EVALUATION; HOSPITAL PLANNING; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL; URBAN AREA;

COMMUNICATION; DECISION MAKING, ORGANIZATIONAL; HEALTH PRIORITIES; HOSPITAL PLANNING; HOSPITALS, TEACHING; HOSPITALS, URBAN; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS; ONTARIO; ORGANIZATIONAL CASE STUDIES; ORGANIZATIONAL OBJECTIVES; PLANNING TECHNIQUES; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY;

EID: 0141963267     PISSN: 13558196     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/135581903322403254     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Canadian Institute for Health Information. www.cihi.ca/facts/nhex/nhex2001/total.shtml
2. MacDonald JK, Shortt SED. An inventory and analysis of accountability practices in the Canadian health system. Kingston, ON: Queen's Health Policy Unity, 1999
3. Singer PA, Martin DK, Giacomini M, Purdy L. Priority setting for new technologies in medicine: a qualitative case study. BMJ 2000; 321: 1316-1318
4. Martin DK, Pater JL, Singer PA. Priority setting decisions for new cancer drugs: a qualitative study. Lancet 2001; 358: 1676-1681
5. Hope T, Hicks N, Reynolds DJM, Crisp R, Griffiths S. Rationing and the health authority. BMJ 1998; 317: 1067-1069
6. Foy R, So J, Rous E, Scarffe JH. Perspectives of commissioners and cancer specialists in prioritising new cancer drugs: impact of the evidence threshold. BMJ 1999; 318: 456-459
7. Deber R, Wiktorowicz M, Leatt P, Champagne F. Technology acquisition in Canadian hospitals: how is it done, and where is the information coming from? Healthcare Management FORUM 1994; 7(4): 18-27
8. Deber R, Wiktorowicz M, Leatt P, Champagne F. Technology acquisition in Canadian hospitals: how are we doing? Health Care Management FORUM 1995; 8(2): 23-28
9. Ham C. Tragic choices in health care: lessons from the child B case. BMJ 1999; 319: 1258-1261
10. Ham C, Coulter A. Explicit and implicit rationing: taking responsibility and avoiding blame for health care choices. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy 2001; 6: 163-169
11. Norheim O. Procedures for priority setting and mechanisms of appeal in the Norwegian health care system. Presentation at the 3rd International Conference on Priorities in Health, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2000
12. Martin DK, Singer PA. Priority setting for health technologies in Canada. In: Ham C, Roberts G, eds. Priority setting in health care. Institutions, information and 'accountability for reasonableness'. London: King's Fund Publications (in press)
13. Yin RK. Case study research: design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1994
14. Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures of developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1998: 204-205
15. Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures of developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1998: 55-242
16. Altheide DL, Johnson JM. Criteria for assessing interpretive validity in qualitative research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, eds. Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1994: 485-499
17. Mays N, Pope C. Qualitative research in health care: assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ 2000; 320: 50-52
18. Mays N, Pope C. Rigour and qualitative research. BMJ 1995; 311: 109-112
19. Daniels N. Accountability for reasonableness. BMJ 2000; 321: 1300-1301
20. Daniels N, Sabin JE. Limits to health care: fair procedures, democratic deliberation and the legitimacy problem for insurers. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1997; 26: 303-350
21. Daniels N, Sabin JE. Setting limits fairly: can we learn to share medical resources? Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002
22. Green J. Commentary: generalizability and validity in qualitative research. BMJ 1999; 319: 420-421
23. Ham C, McIver S. Contested decisions: priority setting in the NHS. London: King's Fund Publishing, 2000