Guidance on priority setting in health care (GPS-Health): the inclusion of equity criteria not captured by cost-effectiveness analysis
Norheim, Ole F
Johansson, Kjell A
Rao, Krishna D
Edejer, Tessa Tan-Torres
Wikler, DanNote: Order does not necessarily reflect citation order of authors.
MetadataShow full item record
CitationNorheim, O. F., R. Baltussen, M. Johri, D. Chisholm, E. Nord, D. Brock, P. Carlsson, et al. 2014. “Guidance on priority setting in health care (GPS-Health): the inclusion of equity criteria not captured by cost-effectiveness analysis.” Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation : C/E 12 (1): 18. doi:10.1186/1478-7547-12-18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-7547-12-18.
AbstractThis Guidance for Priority Setting in Health Care (GPS-Health), initiated by the World Health Organization, offers a comprehensive map of equity criteria that are relevant to health care priority setting and should be considered in addition to cost-effectiveness analysis. The guidance, in the form of a checklist, is especially targeted at decision makers who set priorities at national and sub-national levels, and those who interpret findings from cost-effectiveness analysis. It is also targeted at researchers conducting cost-effectiveness analysis to improve reporting of their results in the light of these other criteria. The guidance was develop through a series of expert consultation meetings and involved three steps: i) methods and normative concepts were identified through a systematic review; ii) the review findings were critically assessed in the expert consultation meetings which resulted in a draft checklist of normative criteria; iii) the checklist was validated though an extensive hearing process with input from a range of relevant stakeholders. The GPS-Health incorporates criteria related to the disease an intervention targets (severity of disease, capacity to benefit, and past health loss); characteristics of social groups an intervention targets (socioeconomic status, area of living, gender; race, ethnicity, religion and sexual orientation); and non-health consequences of an intervention (financial protection, economic productivity, and care for others).
Citable link to this pagehttp://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:12987254