From production to evaluation of health systems technologies: Challenges for the 21st century;Da produção à avaliação de technologias dos sistemas de saúde: Desafios do século XXI

Revista de Saude Publica

Volumn 40, Issue SPEC. ISS., 2006, Pages 133-140

  Novaes, Hillegonda Maria Dutilh ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Delivery of health care; Policy making; Science; Technology; Technology assessment biomedical

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; COMMERCIAL PHENOMENA; DEVELOPED COUNTRY; DEVELOPING COUNTRY; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; MEDICAL INSTRUMENTATION; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE;

EID: 33750043490     PISSN: 00348910     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1590/s0034-89102006000400018     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Alderson P. The importance of theories in health care. BMJ. 1998;317:1007-10.
2. Alter DA, Stukel TA, Newman A. Proliferation of cardiac technology in Canada, Circulation. 2006;113:380-7.
3. a Conferência Nacional de Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação em Saúde; 2004; Brasília, BR. Brasília, DF: Ministério da Saúde, Secretaria de Ciência, Tecnologia e Insumos Estratégicos; 2005.
4. Atun R. What are the advantages and disadvantages of restructuring a health care system more focused on primary care services? Copenhagen: World Health Organization; 2004. (WHO Report Regional Office for Europe's Health Evidence Network). Available in http://www.euro.who.int/ document/e82997.pdf
5. Avorn J. Powerful medicines. The benefits, risks and costs of prescription drugs. New York: Vintage Books; 2005.
6. Banta HD, Luce BR. Health Care Technology Assessment. An international perspective. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications; 1993.
7. Browsnson RC, Royer C, Ewing R, McBride TD. Researchers and Policymakers. Travelers in Parallel Universes. Am J Prev Med. 2006;30:164-72.
8. Cairns J. Providing guidance to the NHS: The Scottish Medicines Consortium and the National Institute for Clinical Excellence compared. Health Policy, 2006;76:134-43.
9. Calnan M, Montaner D, Horne R. How acceptable are innovative health-care technologies? A survey of public beliefs and attitudes in England and Wales. Social Sci Med. 2005;60:1937-8.
10. Castilho EA, Kalil J. Ética e pesquisa médica: princípios, diretrizes e regulamentações. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop. 2005;38:344-7.
11. Clarke AE, Mamo L, Fishman JR, Shim JK, Fosket JR. Biomedicalization: technoscientific transformations of health, illness and U.S. biomedicine. Am Sociol Rev. 2003;68:161-94.
12. Cohen DA, Farley TA, Mason K. Why is poverty unhealthy? Social and physical mediators. Social Sci Med. 2003;57:1631-41.
13. D'Souza C, Sadana R. Why do case studies on national health research systems matter? Identifying common challenges in low- and middle-income countries. Social Sci Med. 2006;62:2072-8.
14. Dobrow MJ, Goel V, Upshur REG. Evidence-based health policy: context and utilisation. Social Sci Med. 2004;58:207-17.
15. Emanuel EJ, Wendler D, Grady C. What makes clinical research ethical? JAMA. 2000;283:2701-11.
16. Eng TR. Population health technologies, Emerging innovations for the health of the public, Am J Prev Med. 2004;26:237-42.
17. Evans RG, Barer ML, Marmor TR, organisateurs. Être ou ne pas être em bonne santé. Montréal: John Libbey Eurotext; 1996.
18. Gadelha CAG, Quental C, Fialho BC. Saúde e inovação: uma abordagem sistêmica clas indústrias de saúde. Cad Saúde Pública. 2003;19:47-59.
19. Gelijns A, Brown LD, Magnell C, Ronchi E, Moskowitz AJ. Evidence, politics and technological change. Health Affairs. 2005;24:29-41.
20. Glied S. Health care costs: on the rise again. J Econ Perspects. 2003;17:125-48.
21. Guimarâes R. Bases para uma política nacional de ciência, tecnologia e inovação em saúde. Ciênc Saúde Coletivá. 2004;9:375-87.
22. Hanney S, Henkel M, Laing DW. Making and implementing foresight policy to engage the academic community: health and life scientists' involvement in, and response to, development of the UK's technology foresight programme. Res Policy. 2001;30:1203-19.
23. Hertzman C, Frank J, Evans RG. L'hétérogénéité de l'état de santé et lês determinants de la santé des populations. In: Evans RG, Barer ML, Marmor TR, organisateurs. Etre ou ne pas être em bonne santé. Montreal: John Libbey Eurotext; 1996. p. 77-102.
24. Kealey T. The economic laws of scientific research. London: Macmillan Press; 1996.
25. Kerner JF. Knowledge translation versus knowledge integration: a "funder's" perspective. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006; 26:70-80.
26. Kindig D, Day P, Fox DM, Gibson M, Knickman J, Lomas J, Stoddart G. What new knowledge would help policymakers better balance investments for optimal health outcomes? HSR: Health Services Res. 2003;36:1923-37.
27. King D. The scientific impact of nations. Nature. 2004;430:311-6.
28. Koopman JS, Lynch JW. Individual causal models and population system models in epidemiology. Am J Public Health. 1999;89:1170-4.
29. Lall S. Indicators of the relative importance of IPRs in developing countries. Res Policy. 2003;32:1657-80.
30. Leschin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, Clark O. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ. 2003;326:1167-77.
31. Litva A, Coast J, Donovan J, Eyles J, Shepherd M, Tacchi J, et al. 'The public is too subjective': public involvement at different levels of health-care rationing decision making. Social Sci Med. 2002;54:1825-837.
32. Magnussen L, Ehirl J, Solly P. Comprehensive versus selective primary health care: lessons in Global Health Policy. Health Affairs. 2004;23:167-97.
33. Marmor T, Barer ML, Evans RG. Les determinants de la santé des populations: comment améliorer l'état de santé dans les pays démocratiques? In: Evans RG, Barer ML, Marmor TR, organisateurs. Être ou ne pas être em bonne santé. Montréal: John Libbey Eurotext; 1996. p. 223-36.
34. Mawson AR. On not taking the world as you find it-epidemiology in its place. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55:1-4.
35. Ministério da Ciência e da Tecnologia - MCT. Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação. Livro Verde. Brasília (DF): Ministério da Ciência e da Tecnologia/Academia Brasileira de Ciências; 2001.
36. Moran M, Alexander E. Technology, American Democracy and Health Care. Br J Polit Sci. 1997;27:573-94.
37. Nelson RR. On the uneven evolution of human know-how. Res Policy. 2003;32:909-22.
38. Novaes HMD, Goldbaum M, Carvalheiro JR. Políticas cientificas e tecnológicas e saúde. Revista USP. 2001;51:28-37.
39. Novaes HMD. A puericultura em questão. Almanaque. 1980;11:37-47.
40. Novaes HMD. Avaliação de programas, serviços e tecnologias em saúde. Rev Saúde Pública. 2000; 34:547-59.
41. Novaes HMD. Pesquisa em, sobre e para os serviços de saúde: panorama internacional e questões para a pesquisa em saúde no Brasil. Cad Saúde Pública. 2004;20(Supl 2):S147-S74.
42. Novaes HMD. Social impacts of technological diffusion: prenatal diagnosis and induced abortion in Brazil. Social Sci Med. 2000;50:41-51.
43. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development - OECD. Health technologies and decision making. Paris: OECD; 1995.
44. Oliver A, Mossailos E, Robinson R. Health technology assessment and its influence on health0care priority setting. Int J Tech Assess Health Care. 2004;20:1-10.
45. Rodwin MA. Medicine, money & morals. New York Oxford University Press; 1003.
46. Rosenberg N. How the developed countries became rich. Daedalus. 1994;123:127-40.
47. Said C. Análise do setor de saúde na área de equipamentos. In: Negri B, Giovanni G, organizadores. Radiografia da saúde. Campinas: Unicamp/Instituto de Economia; 2001. p. 91-122.
48. Salter B. Who rules? The new politics of medical regulation. Social Sci Med. 2001;52:871-83.
49. Silva LK. Avalia̧tiao tecnológica e análise custo-efetividade em saúde: a incorporação de tecnologias e a produção de diretrizes clínicas para o SUS. Ciênc Saúde Coletiva. 2003;8:501-20.
50. Singer PA, Pellegrino ED, Siegler M. Clinical ethics revisited. BMC Medical Ethics. 2001,2:1.
51. Smith BLR, Barfield CE. Contributions of research and technical advance to the economy. In: Smith BLR, Barfield CE, editors. Technology, R&D and the economy. Washington (DC): The Brookings Institution; 1995. p. 1-14.
52. Sugahara CR, Jannuzzi PM. Estudo do uso de fontes de informação para inovação tecnológica na indústria brasileira. Ci Inf. 2005;34:45-56.
53. Taylor RS, Drummond MF, Sullivan SD. Inclusion of cost effectiveness in licensing requirements of new drugs:the fourth hurdle. BMJ. 2004;329:972-5.
54. Victora CG, Hausen K, Bryce J, Vaughn JP. Achieving universal coverage with health interventions. Lancet. 2004;364:1541-8.
55. Wilkinson RG. The epidemiological transition: from material scarcity to social disadvantage? Daedalus. 1994;123:61-78.
56. Williams I, Bryan S. Understanding the limited impact of economic evaluation in health resource allocation: a conceptual framework. Health Policy. 2006. in press.
57. Wirtz V, Cribb A, Barber N. Reimbursement decisions in health policy-extending our understanding of the elements of decision-making. Health Policy. 2005;73:330-8.
58. Woolf SH. Society' Choice. The tradeoff between efficacy and equity and the lives at stake. Am J Prev Med. 2004;27:49-56.