Medicine and society: Public engagement in setting priorities in health care

CMAJ. Canadian Medical Association Journal

Volumn 179, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 15-18

  Bruni, Rebecca A ^a,b   Laupacis, Andreas ^b,c,d   Martin, Douglas K ^a,c  

^a at the University of Toronto Wagner is also a faculty member of the Canadian Medical Associations' Physician Management Institute   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^d ST MICHAEL'S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; NOTE; PROBABILITY; PUBLIC HEALTH; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; TRUST; ADVISORY COMMITTEE; ARTICLE; CANADA; CONSUMER; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH SERVICE; HUMAN; PUBLIC OPINION;

ADVISORY COMMITTEES; CANADA; CONSUMER PARTICIPATION; HEALTH POLICY; HEALTH PRIORITIES; HEALTH SERVICES NEEDS AND DEMAND; HUMANS; PUBLIC OPINION;

EID: 47049129932     PISSN: 08203946     EISSN: 14882329     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.071656     Document Type: Note

References (21)

1. New B, editor. Rationing: talk and action in healthcare. London (UK): Blackwell BMJ Books; 1997.
2. Daniels N, Sabin J. Setting limits fairly: Can we learn to share medical resources? New York: Oxford University Press; 2002.
3. Goldman J. Millions of voices: a blueprint for engaging the American public in national policy-making. Washington (DC): America Speaks; 2004.
4. Traulsen JM, Almarsdóttir AB. Pharmaceutical policy and the lay public. Pharm World Sci 2005;27:273-7.
5. Ham C. Rationing in action: priority setting in the NHS: reports from six districts. BMJ 1993;307:435-8.
6. Burgess M. What difference does public consultation make in ethics? [Electronic Working Paper series]. Vancouver: W. Maurice Centre for Applied Ethics, University of British Columbia; 2003.
7. Knox C, McAlister D. Policy evaluation: incorporating users' views. Public Adm 1995;73:413-36.
8. Lomas J. Reluctant rationers: public input to health care priorities. J Health Serv Res Policy 1997;2:103-11.
9. Kapiriri L, Norheim OF, Heggenhougen K. Public participation in health planning and priority setting at the district level in Uganda. Health Policy Plan 2003;18:205-13.
10. Lenaghan J. Involving the public in rationing decisions. The experience of citizens juries. Health Policy 1999;49:45-61.
11. O'Hara K. Citizen engagement in the social union. In: Securing the social union. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks; 1998. p. 77-110.
12. Turnbull L, Aucoin P. Fostering Canadians' role in public policy: a strategy for institutionalizing public involvement in policy. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks; 2006.
13. Gibson JL, Martin DK, Singer PA. Priority setting in hospitals: fairness, inclusiveness, and the problem of institutional power differences. Soc Sci Med 2005;61:2355-62.
14. Martin DK, Abelson J, Singer PA. Participation in health care priority-setting through the eyes of the participants. J Health Serv Res Policy 2002;7:222-9.
15. Abelson J, Giacomini M, Lehoux P, et al. Bringing "the public" into health technology assessment and coverage policy decisions: from principles to practice. Health Policy 2007;82:37-50.
16. Dixon J, Welch HG. Priority setting: lessons from Oregon. Lancet 1991;337:891-4.
17. Edgar W. Rationing health care in New Zealand - how the public has a say. In: Coulter A, Ham C, editors. The global challenge of healthcare rationing. Philadelphia: Open University Press; 2000. p. 175-91.
18. Kelson M. The NICE Patient Involvement Unit. Evidence-Based Healthcare Public Health 2005;9:304-7. Available: www.mdconsult.com/das/article/body/ 87766853-2/jorg=journal&source=&sp=N&sid=0/N/480685/1.html?issn= (accessed 2008 Feb 12).
19. Swedish Parliamentary Priorities Commission. Priorities in health care. Stockholm: Ministry of Health and Social Affairs; 1995.
20. Shani S, Siebzehner MI, Luxenburg O, et al. Setting priorities for the adoption of health technologies on a national level - the Israeli experience. Health Policy 2000;54:169-85.
21. Dyer C. NICE faces legal challenge over Alzheimer's drug. BMJ 2007;334:654-5.