Decision-Making Criteria among National Policymakers in Five Countries: A Discrete Choice Experiment Eliciting Relative Preferences for Equity and Efficiency

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Mirelman, Andrew
Data de Publicação: 2012
Outros Autores: Mentzakis, Emmanouil, Kinter, Elizabeth, Paolucci, Francesco, Fordham, Richard, Ozawa, Sachiko, Ferraz, Marcos Bosi [UNIFESP], Baltussen, Rob, Niessen, Louis W.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
Texto Completo: http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/34814
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2012.04.001
Resumo: Background: Worldwide, there is a need for formalization of the priority setting processes in health. Recent research has used the term multicriteria decision analysis for methods that systematically include preferences for both equity and efficiency. the present study compares decision-makers' preferences at the country level for a set of equity and efficiency criteria according to a multicriteria decision analysis framework. Methods: Discrete choice experiments were conducted for Brazil, Cuba, Nepal, Norway, and Uganda. By using standardized methods, we elicited preferences for intervention attributes using a individual choice questionnaire. A multinomial logistic regression was applied to estimate the coefficients for all single-policy criteria, per country. Attributes were assigned to an equity group or to an efficiency group. After testing for scale variance, predicted probabilities for interventions with both types of attributes were compared across countries. Results: the Norway and Nepal groups showed considerable prefer-ences for efficiency criteria over equity criteria with percent change in respective predicted sum probabilities of [10%, -84%] and [6%, -79%]. Brazil and Uganda also showed preference for the efficiency criteria though less convincingly ([-34%, -93%], [-18%, -63%], respectively). the Cuban group showed the strongest preferences with equity attributes dominating efficiency ([-52%, 213%]). Conclusions: Group preferences of policymakers show explicit but varying trade-offs of efficiency and equity in these diverse settings. This multicriteria decision analysis approach, using discrete choice experiments, indicates that systematic setting of health priorities is possible across a variety of countries. It may be a valuable tool to guide health reform initiatives.
id UFSP_aac41520adf1e0d8287fc2d9ed2e8db9
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unifesp.br:11600/34814
network_acronym_str UFSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
repository_id_str 3465
spelling Mirelman, AndrewMentzakis, EmmanouilKinter, ElizabethPaolucci, FrancescoFordham, RichardOzawa, SachikoFerraz, Marcos Bosi [UNIFESP]Baltussen, RobNiessen, Louis W.Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Sch Publ HlthUniv E AngliaCampbell AllianceAustralian Natl UnivUniversidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)Radboud Univ Nijmegen2016-01-24T14:27:08Z2016-01-24T14:27:08Z2012-05-01Value in Health. New York: Elsevier B.V., v. 15, n. 3, p. 534-539, 2012.1098-3015http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/34814http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2012.04.001WOS000303940600017.pdf10.1016/j.jval.2012.04.001WOS:000303940600017Background: Worldwide, there is a need for formalization of the priority setting processes in health. Recent research has used the term multicriteria decision analysis for methods that systematically include preferences for both equity and efficiency. the present study compares decision-makers' preferences at the country level for a set of equity and efficiency criteria according to a multicriteria decision analysis framework. Methods: Discrete choice experiments were conducted for Brazil, Cuba, Nepal, Norway, and Uganda. By using standardized methods, we elicited preferences for intervention attributes using a individual choice questionnaire. A multinomial logistic regression was applied to estimate the coefficients for all single-policy criteria, per country. Attributes were assigned to an equity group or to an efficiency group. After testing for scale variance, predicted probabilities for interventions with both types of attributes were compared across countries. Results: the Norway and Nepal groups showed considerable prefer-ences for efficiency criteria over equity criteria with percent change in respective predicted sum probabilities of [10%, -84%] and [6%, -79%]. Brazil and Uganda also showed preference for the efficiency criteria though less convincingly ([-34%, -93%], [-18%, -63%], respectively). the Cuban group showed the strongest preferences with equity attributes dominating efficiency ([-52%, 213%]). Conclusions: Group preferences of policymakers show explicit but varying trade-offs of efficiency and equity in these diverse settings. This multicriteria decision analysis approach, using discrete choice experiments, indicates that systematic setting of health priorities is possible across a variety of countries. It may be a valuable tool to guide health reform initiatives.Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Sch Publ Hlth, Baltimore, MD 21205 USAUniv E Anglia, Norwich Med Sch, Norwich NR4 7TJ, Norfolk, EnglandCampbell Alliance, Boston, MA USAAustralian Natl Univ, Australian Ctr Econ Res Hlth, Canberra, ACT, AustraliaUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo Ctr Hlth Econ, São Paulo, BrazilRadboud Univ Nijmegen, Dept Primary & Community Care, Nijmegen Med Ctr, NL-6525 ED Nijmegen, NetherlandsUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo Ctr Hlth Econ, São Paulo, BrazilWeb of Science534-539engElsevier B.V.Value in Healthhttp://www.elsevier.com/about/open-access/open-access-policies/article-posting-policyinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessdiscrete choice experimentefficiencyequitypriority settingDecision-Making Criteria among National Policymakers in Five Countries: A Discrete Choice Experiment Eliciting Relative Preferences for Equity and Efficiencyinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlereponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESPinstname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)instacron:UNIFESPORIGINALWOS000303940600017.pdfapplication/pdf279055${dspace.ui.url}/bitstream/11600/34814/1/WOS000303940600017.pdff992017c9d6ae4a43742024475f66620MD51open accessTEXTWOS000303940600017.pdf.txtWOS000303940600017.pdf.txtExtracted texttext/plain37704${dspace.ui.url}/bitstream/11600/34814/2/WOS000303940600017.pdf.txt7c95879b98762877d234715217c0fbbdMD52open access11600/348142022-11-03 10:40:51.184open accessoai:repositorio.unifesp.br:11600/34814Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://www.repositorio.unifesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:34652022-11-03T13:40:51Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)false
dc.title.en.fl_str_mv Decision-Making Criteria among National Policymakers in Five Countries: A Discrete Choice Experiment Eliciting Relative Preferences for Equity and Efficiency
title Decision-Making Criteria among National Policymakers in Five Countries: A Discrete Choice Experiment Eliciting Relative Preferences for Equity and Efficiency
spellingShingle Decision-Making Criteria among National Policymakers in Five Countries: A Discrete Choice Experiment Eliciting Relative Preferences for Equity and Efficiency
Mirelman, Andrew
discrete choice experiment
efficiency
equity
priority setting
title_short Decision-Making Criteria among National Policymakers in Five Countries: A Discrete Choice Experiment Eliciting Relative Preferences for Equity and Efficiency
title_full Decision-Making Criteria among National Policymakers in Five Countries: A Discrete Choice Experiment Eliciting Relative Preferences for Equity and Efficiency
title_fullStr Decision-Making Criteria among National Policymakers in Five Countries: A Discrete Choice Experiment Eliciting Relative Preferences for Equity and Efficiency
title_full_unstemmed Decision-Making Criteria among National Policymakers in Five Countries: A Discrete Choice Experiment Eliciting Relative Preferences for Equity and Efficiency
title_sort Decision-Making Criteria among National Policymakers in Five Countries: A Discrete Choice Experiment Eliciting Relative Preferences for Equity and Efficiency
author Mirelman, Andrew
author_facet Mirelman, Andrew
Mentzakis, Emmanouil
Kinter, Elizabeth
Paolucci, Francesco
Fordham, Richard
Ozawa, Sachiko
Ferraz, Marcos Bosi [UNIFESP]
Baltussen, Rob
Niessen, Louis W.
author_role author
author2 Mentzakis, Emmanouil
Kinter, Elizabeth
Paolucci, Francesco
Fordham, Richard
Ozawa, Sachiko
Ferraz, Marcos Bosi [UNIFESP]
Baltussen, Rob
Niessen, Louis W.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.institution.none.fl_str_mv Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Sch Publ Hlth
Univ E Anglia
Campbell Alliance
Australian Natl Univ
Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
Radboud Univ Nijmegen
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Mirelman, Andrew
Mentzakis, Emmanouil
Kinter, Elizabeth
Paolucci, Francesco
Fordham, Richard
Ozawa, Sachiko
Ferraz, Marcos Bosi [UNIFESP]
Baltussen, Rob
Niessen, Louis W.
dc.subject.eng.fl_str_mv discrete choice experiment
efficiency
equity
priority setting
topic discrete choice experiment
efficiency
equity
priority setting
description Background: Worldwide, there is a need for formalization of the priority setting processes in health. Recent research has used the term multicriteria decision analysis for methods that systematically include preferences for both equity and efficiency. the present study compares decision-makers' preferences at the country level for a set of equity and efficiency criteria according to a multicriteria decision analysis framework. Methods: Discrete choice experiments were conducted for Brazil, Cuba, Nepal, Norway, and Uganda. By using standardized methods, we elicited preferences for intervention attributes using a individual choice questionnaire. A multinomial logistic regression was applied to estimate the coefficients for all single-policy criteria, per country. Attributes were assigned to an equity group or to an efficiency group. After testing for scale variance, predicted probabilities for interventions with both types of attributes were compared across countries. Results: the Norway and Nepal groups showed considerable prefer-ences for efficiency criteria over equity criteria with percent change in respective predicted sum probabilities of [10%, -84%] and [6%, -79%]. Brazil and Uganda also showed preference for the efficiency criteria though less convincingly ([-34%, -93%], [-18%, -63%], respectively). the Cuban group showed the strongest preferences with equity attributes dominating efficiency ([-52%, 213%]). Conclusions: Group preferences of policymakers show explicit but varying trade-offs of efficiency and equity in these diverse settings. This multicriteria decision analysis approach, using discrete choice experiments, indicates that systematic setting of health priorities is possible across a variety of countries. It may be a valuable tool to guide health reform initiatives.
publishDate 2012
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv 2012-05-01
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv 2016-01-24T14:27:08Z
dc.date.available.fl_str_mv 2016-01-24T14:27:08Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.citation.fl_str_mv Value in Health. New York: Elsevier B.V., v. 15, n. 3, p. 534-539, 2012.
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/34814
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2012.04.001
dc.identifier.issn.none.fl_str_mv 1098-3015
dc.identifier.file.none.fl_str_mv WOS000303940600017.pdf
dc.identifier.doi.none.fl_str_mv 10.1016/j.jval.2012.04.001
dc.identifier.wos.none.fl_str_mv WOS:000303940600017
identifier_str_mv Value in Health. New York: Elsevier B.V., v. 15, n. 3, p. 534-539, 2012.
1098-3015
WOS000303940600017.pdf
10.1016/j.jval.2012.04.001
WOS:000303940600017
url http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/34814
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2012.04.001
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.ispartof.none.fl_str_mv Value in Health
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv http://www.elsevier.com/about/open-access/open-access-policies/article-posting-policy
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv http://www.elsevier.com/about/open-access/open-access-policies/article-posting-policy
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv 534-539
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier B.V.
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier B.V.
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
instname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
instacron:UNIFESP
instname_str Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
instacron_str UNIFESP
institution UNIFESP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
collection Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv ${dspace.ui.url}/bitstream/11600/34814/1/WOS000303940600017.pdf
${dspace.ui.url}/bitstream/11600/34814/2/WOS000303940600017.pdf.txt
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv f992017c9d6ae4a43742024475f66620
7c95879b98762877d234715217c0fbbd
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv MD5
MD5
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1802764178930270208