Which criteria are considered in healthcare decisions? Insights from an international survey of policy and clinical decision makers

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 29, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 456-465

  Tanios, Nataly ^a,b   Wagner, Monika ^c   Tony, Michèle ^a,b   Baltussen, Rob ^d   Van Til, Janine ^e   Rindress, Donnax ^c   Kind, Paul ^f   Goetghebeur, Mireille M ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^b EVIDEM Collaboration   (Canada)

^c LASER Analytica   (Canada)

^d RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^e UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^f UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Criteria; Decision making; Health care; Multicriteria; Priority setting

Indexed keywords

CRITERIA; HEALTH-CARE DECISIONS; INFERENTIAL STATISTICS; MULTI-CRITERIA; PRIORITY SETTING; STAKEHOLDER PRESSURES; STATISTICAL DIFFERENCES; STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE;

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; HEALTH CARE; SURVEYS;

DECISION MAKING;

CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; DISEASE SEVERITY; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE SURVEY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REVIEW; SAFETY; SKILL; ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL; DECISION MAKING; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; PROBLEM SOLVING; PSYCHOLOGY; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; QUESTIONNAIRE;

ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL; DECISION MAKING; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; HUMANS; INTERNATIONALITY; PROBLEM SOLVING; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84889562526     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: 14716348     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462313000573     Document Type: Review

References (27)

1. Baltussen R, Niessen L. Priority setting of health interventions: The need for multi-criteria decision analysis. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2006;4: 14.
2. Daniels N, Sabin J. Limits to health care: Fair procedures, democratic deliberation, and the legitimacy problem for insurers. Philos Public Aff. 1997;26:303-350.
3. Culyer AJ, Bombard Y. An equity framework for health technology assessments. Med Decis Making. 2012;32:428-441.
4. Phillips LD, Fasolo B, Zafiropoulos N, Beyer A. Is quantitative benefitrisk modelling of drugs desirable or possible? Drug Discov Today Technol. 2011;8:e3-e10.
5. Burls A, Austin D, Moore D. Commissioning for rare diseases: View from the frontline. BMJ. 2005;331:1019-1021.
6. Bowen S, Zwi AB. Pathways to "evidence-informed" policy and practice: A framework for action. PLoS Med. 2005;2:e166.
7. Browman GP, Manns B, Hagen N, et al. 6-STEPPPs: A modular tool to facilitate clinician participation in fair decisions for funding new cancer drugs. J Oncol Pract. 2008;4:2-7.
8. Goetghebeur M,WagnerM, Khoury H, et al. Evidence and value: Impact on DEcisionMaking-the EVIDEM framework and potential applications. BMC Health Serv Res. 2008;8:270.
9. Golan OG, Hansen P. Which health technologies should be funded? A prioritization framework based explicitly on value for money. Isr J Health Policy Res. 2012;1:44.
10. Honore PA, Fos PJ, Smith T, Riley M, Kramarz K. Decision science: A scientific approach to enhance public health budgeting. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2010;16:98-103.
11. Johnson AP, Sikich NJ, Evans G, et al. Health technology assessment: A comprehensive framework for evidence-based recommendations in Ontario. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25:141-150.
12. Tannahill A. Beyond evidence-to ethics: A decision-making framework for health promotion, public health and health improvement. Health Promot Int. 2008;23:380-390.
13. Wilson EC, Rees J, Fordham RJ. Developing a prioritisation framework in an English Primary Care Trust. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2006;4:3.
14. Goetghebeur MM, Wagner M, Khoury H, et al. Combining multicriteria decision analysis, ethics and health technology assessment: Applying the EVIDEM decisionmaking framework to growth hormone for Turner syndrome patients. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2010;8:4-18.
15. Guindo LA, Wagner M, Baltussen R, et al. From efficacy to equity: Review of decision criteria used in resource allocation and healthcare decisionmaking. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2012;10:9.
16. Mirelman A, Mentzakis E, Kinter E, et al. Decision-making criteria among national policymakers in five countries: A discrete choice experiment eliciting relative preferences for equity and efficiency. Value Health. 2012;15:534-539.
17. Youngkong S, Kapiriri L, Baltussen R. Setting priorities for health interventions in developing countries: A review of empirical studies. Trop Med Int Health. 2009;14:930-939.
18. Golan O, Hansen P, Kaplan G, Tal O. Health technology prioritization: Which criteria for prioritizing newtechnologies andwhat are their relative weights? Health Policy. 2011;102:126-135.
19. Gibson JL, Martin DK, Singer PA. Evidence, economics and ethics: Resource allocation in health services organizations. Healthc Q. 2005;8:50-59, 4.
20. Djulbegovic B, Trikalinos TA, Roback J, Chen R, Guyatt G. Impact of quality of evidence on the strength of recommendations: An empirical study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2009;9:120.
21. Brozek JL, Akl EA, Alonso-Coello P, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in clinical practice guidelines. Part 1 of 3. An overview of the GRADE approach and grading quality of evidence about interventions. Allergy. 2009;64:669-677.
22. Evers S, Goossens M, de Vet H, van Tulder M, Ament A. Criteria list for assessment of methodological quality of economic evaluations: Consensus on HealTheconomic Criteria. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005;21:240-245.
23. Saarni SI, Hofmann B, Lampe K, et al. Ethical analysis to improve decision-making on health technologies. Bull World Health Organ. 2008;86:617-623.
24. Burls A, Caron L, Cleret de Langavant G, et al. Tackling ethical issues in health technology assessment: A proposed framework. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2011;27:230-237.
25. Peacock SJ,Mitton C, RutaD, et al. Priority setting in healthcare: Towards guidelines for the program budgeting and marginal analysis framework. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2010;10:539-552.
26. Dubois RW, Graff JS. Setting priorities for comparative effectiveness research: From assessing public health benefits to being open with the public. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011;30:2235-2242.
27. Hyder AA, Corluka A, Winch PJ, et al. National policy-makers speak out: Are researchers giving them what they need? Health Policy Plan. 2011;26:73-82.