Priority setting in Indigenous health: assessing priority setting process and criteria that should guide the health system to improve Indigenous Australian health

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Introduction The health of Indigenous Australians is worse than that of other Australians. Most of the determinants of health are preventable and the poor health outcomes are inequitable. The Australian Government recently pledged to close that health gap. One possible way is to improve the priority setting process to ensure transparency and the use of evidence such as epidemiology, equity and economic evaluation. The purpose of this research was to elicit the perceptions of Indigenous and non-Indigenous decision-makers on several issues related to priority setting in Indigenous-specific health care services. Specifically, we aimed to: 1. identify the criteria used to set priorities in Indigenous-specific health care services; 2. determine the level of uptake of economic evaluation evidence by decision-makers and how to improve its uptake; and 3. identify how the priority setting process can be improved from the perspective of decision-makers. Methods We used a paper survey instrument, adapted from Mitton and colleagues’ work, and a face-to-face interview approach to elicit decision-makers’ perceptions in Indigenous-specific health care in Victoria, Australia. We used mixed methods to analyse data from the survey. Responses were summarised using descriptive statistics and content analysis. Results were reported as numbers and percentages. Results The size of the health burden; sustainability and acceptability of interventions; historical trends/patterns; and efficiency are key criteria for making choices in Indigenous health in Victoria. There is a need for an explicit priority setting approach, which is systematic, and is able to use available data/evidence, such as economic evaluation evidence. The involvement of Indigenous Australians in the process would potentially make the process acceptable. Conclusions An economic approach to priority setting is a potentially acceptable and useful tool for Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services (ACCHS). It has the ability to use evidence and ensure due process at the same time. The use of evidence can ensure that health outcomes for Indigenous peoples can be maximised – hence, increase the potential for ‘closing the gap’ between Indigenous and other Australians. PMID:24906391

[The Danish debate on priority setting in medicine - characteristics and results].

PubMed

Pornak, S; Meyer, T; Raspe, H

2011-10-01

Priority setting in medicine helps to achieve a fair and transparent distribution of health-care resources. The German discussion about priority setting is still in its infancy and may benefit from other countries' experiences. This paper aims to analyse the Danish priority setting debate in order to stimulate the German discussion. The methods used are a literature analysis and a document analysis as well as expert interviews. The Danish debate about priority setting in medicine began in the 1970s, when a government committee was constituted to evaluate health-care priorities at the national level. In the 1980s a broader debate arose in politics, ethics, medicine and health economy. The discussions reached a climax in the 1990s, when many local activities - always involving the public - were initiated. Some Danish counties tried to implement priority setting in the daily routine of health care. The Council of Ethics was a major player in the debate of the 1990s and published a detailed statement on priority setting in 1996. With the new century the debate about priority setting seemed to have come to an end, but in 2006 the Technology Council and the Danish Regions resumed the discussion. In 2009 the Medical Association called for a broad debate in order to achieve equity among all patients. The long lasting Danish debate on priority setting has entailed only very little practical consequences on health care. The main problems seem to have been the missing effort to bundle the various local initiatives on a national level and the lack of powerful players to put results of the discussion into practice. Nevertheless, today the attitude towards priority setting is predominantly positive and even politicians talk freely about it. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Healthcare priority setting in Kenya: a gap analysis applying the accountability for reasonableness framework.

PubMed

Bukachi, Salome A; Onyango-Ouma, Washington; Siso, Jared Maaka; Nyamongo, Isaac K; Mutai, Joseph K; Hurtig, Anna Karin; Olsen, Oystein Evjen; Byskov, Jens

2014-01-01

In resource-poor settings, the accountability for reasonableness (A4R) has been identified as an important advance in priority setting that helps to operationalize fair priority setting in specific contexts. The four conditions of A4R are backed by theory, not evidence, that conformance with them improves the priority setting decisions. This paper describes the healthcare priority setting processes in Malindi district, Kenya, prior to the implementation of A4R in 2008 and evaluates the process for its conformance with the conditions for A4R. In-depth interviews and focus group discussions with key players in the Malindi district health system and a review of key policy documents and national guidelines show that the priority setting process in the district relies heavily on guidelines from the national level, making it more of a vertical, top-down orientation. Multilateral and donor agencies, national government, budgetary requirements, traditions and local culture influence the process. The four conditions of A4R are present within the priority setting process, albeit to varying degrees and referred to by different terms. There exists an opportunity for A4R to provide a guiding approach within which its four conditions can be strengthened and assessed to establish whether conformance helps improve on the priority setting process. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 3: Setting priorities for supporting evidence-informed policymaking

PubMed Central

2009-01-01

This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. Policymakers have limited resources for developing – or supporting the development of – evidence-informed policies and programmes. These required resources include staff time, staff infrastructural needs (such as access to a librarian or journal article purchasing), and ongoing professional development. They may therefore prefer instead to contract out such work to independent units with more suitably skilled staff and appropriate infrastructure. However, policymakers may only have limited financial resources to do so. Regardless of whether the support for evidence-informed policymaking is provided in-house or contracted out, or whether it is centralised or decentralised, resources always need to be used wisely in order to maximise their impact. Examples of undesirable practices in a priority-setting approach include timelines to support evidence-informed policymaking being negotiated on a case-by-case basis (instead of having clear norms about the level of support that can be provided for each timeline), implicit (rather than explicit) criteria for setting priorities, ad hoc (rather than systematic and explicit) priority-setting process, and the absence of both a communications plan and a monitoring and evaluation plan. In this article, we suggest questions that can guide those setting priorities for finding and using research evidence to support evidence-informed policymaking. These are: 1. Does the approach to prioritisation make clear the timelines that have been set for addressing high-priority issues in different ways? 2. Does the approach incorporate explicit criteria for determining priorities? 3. Does the approach incorporate an explicit process for determining priorities? 4. Does the approach incorporate a communications strategy and a monitoring and evaluation plan? PMID:20018110

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 3: Setting priorities for supporting evidence-informed policymaking.

PubMed

Lavis, John N; Oxman, Andrew D; Lewin, Simon; Fretheim, Atle

2009-12-16

This article is part of a series written for people responsible for making decisions about health policies and programmes and for those who support these decision makers. Policymakers have limited resources for developing--or supporting the development of--evidence-informed policies and programmes. These required resources include staff time, staff infrastructural needs (such as access to a librarian or journal article purchasing), and ongoing professional development. They may therefore prefer instead to contract out such work to independent units with more suitably skilled staff and appropriate infrastructure. However, policymakers may only have limited financial resources to do so. Regardless of whether the support for evidence-informed policymaking is provided in-house or contracted out, or whether it is centralised or decentralised, resources always need to be used wisely in order to maximise their impact. Examples of undesirable practices in a priority-setting approach include timelines to support evidence-informed policymaking being negotiated on a case-by-case basis (instead of having clear norms about the level of support that can be provided for each timeline), implicit (rather than explicit) criteria for setting priorities, ad hoc (rather than systematic and explicit) priority-setting process, and the absence of both a communications plan and a monitoring and evaluation plan. In this article, we suggest questions that can guide those setting priorities for finding and using research evidence to support evidence-informed policymaking. These are: 1. Does the approach to prioritisation make clear the timelines that have been set for addressing high-priority issues in different ways? 2. Does the approach incorporate explicit criteria for determining priorities? 3. Does the approach incorporate an explicit process for determining priorities? 4. Does the approach incorporate a communications strategy and a monitoring and evaluation plan?

Priority setting in developing countries health care institutions: the case of a Ugandan hospital

PubMed Central

Kapiriri, Lydia; Martin, Douglas K

2006-01-01

Background Because the demand for health services outstrips the available resources, priority setting is one of the most difficult issues faced by health policy makers, particularly those in developing countries. However, there is lack of literature that describes and evaluates priority setting in these contexts. The objective of this paper is to describe priority setting in a teaching hospital in Uganda and evaluate the description against an ethical framework for fair priority setting processes – Accountability for Reasonableness. Methods A case study in a 1,500 bed national referral hospital receiving 1,320 out patients per day and an average budget of US$ 13.5 million per year. We reviewed documents and carried out 70 in-depth interviews (14 health planners, 40 doctors, and 16 nurses working at the hospital). Interviews were recorded and transcribed. Data analysis employed the modified thematic approach to describe priority setting, and the description was evaluated using the four conditions of Accountability for Reasonableness: relevance, publicity, revisions and enforcement. Results Senior managers, guided by the hospital strategic plan make the hospital budget allocation decisions. Frontline practitioners expressed lack of knowledge of the process. Relevance: Priority is given according to a cluster of factors including need, emergencies and patient volume. However, surgical departments and departments whose leaders "make a lot of noise" are also prioritized. Publicity: Decisions, but not reasons, are publicized through general meetings and circulars, but this information does not always reach the frontline practitioners. Publicity to the general public was through ad hoc radio programs and to patients who directly ask. Revisions: There were no formal mechanisms for challenging the reasoning. Enforcement: There were no mechanisms to ensure adherence to the four conditions of a fair process. Conclusion Priority setting decisions at this hospital do not satisfy the conditions of fairness. To improve, the hospital should: (i) engage frontline practitioners, (ii) publicize the reasons for decisions both within the hospital and to the general public, and (iii) develop formal mechanisms for challenging the reasoning. In addition, capacity strengthening is required for senior managers who must accept responsibility for ensuring that the above three conditions are met. PMID:17026761

Priority setting at the micro-, meso- and macro-levels in Canada, Norway and Uganda.

PubMed

Kapiriri, Lydia; Norheim, Ole Frithjof; Martin, Douglas K

2007-06-01

The objectives of this study were (1) to describe the process of healthcare priority setting in Ontario-Canada, Norway and Uganda at the three levels of decision-making; (2) to evaluate the description using the framework for fair priority setting, accountability for reasonableness; so as to identify lessons of good practices. We carried out case studies involving key informant interviews, with 184 health practitioners and health planners from the macro-level, meso-level and micro-level from Canada-Ontario, Norway and Uganda (selected by virtue of their varying experiences in priority setting). Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed using a modified thematic approach. The descriptions were evaluated against the four conditions of "accountability for reasonableness", relevance, publicity, revisions and enforcement. Areas of adherence to these conditions were identified as lessons of good practices; areas of non-adherence were identified as opportunities for improvement. (i) at the macro-level, in all three countries, cabinet makes most of the macro-level resource allocation decisions and they are influenced by politics, public pressure, and advocacy. Decisions within the ministries of health are based on objective formulae and evidence. International priorities influenced decisions in Uganda. Some priority-setting reasons are publicized through circulars, printed documents and the Internet in Canada and Norway. At the meso-level, hospital priority-setting decisions were made by the hospital managers and were based on national priorities, guidelines, and evidence. Hospital departments that handle emergencies, such as surgery, were prioritized. Some of the reasons are available on the hospital intranet or presented at meetings. Micro-level practitioners considered medical and social worth criteria. These reasons are not publicized. Many practitioners lacked knowledge of the macro- and meso-level priority-setting processes. (ii) Evaluation-relevance: medical evidence and economic criteria were thought to be relevant, but lobbying was thought to be irrelevant. Publicity: all cases lacked clear and effective mechanisms for publicity. REVISIONS: formal mechanisms, following the planning hierarchy, were considered less effective, informal political mechanisms were considered more effective. Canada and Norway had patients' relations officers to deal with patients' dissensions; however, revisions were more difficult in Uganda. Enforcement: leadership for ensuring decision-making fairness was not apparent. The different levels of priority setting in the three countries fulfilled varying conditions of accountability for reasonableness, none satisfied all the four conditions. To improve, decision makers at the three levels in all three cases should engage frontline practitioners, develop more effectively publicized reasons, and develop formal mechanisms for challenging and revising decisions.

Priority setting in HIV/AIDS control in West Java Indonesia: an evaluation based on the accountability for reasonableness framework.

PubMed

Tromp, Noor; Prawiranegara, Rozar; Subhan Riparev, Harris; Siregar, Adiatma; Sunjaya, Deni; Baltussen, Rob

2015-04-01

Indonesia has insufficient resources to adequately respond to the HIV/AIDS epidemic, and thus faces a great challenge in prioritizing interventions. In many countries, such priority setting processes are typically ad hoc and not transparent leading to unfair decisions. Here, we evaluated the priority setting process in HIV/AIDS control in West Java province against the four conditions of the accountability for reasonableness (A4R) framework: relevance, publicity, appeals and revision, and enforcement. We reviewed government documents and conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews based on the A4R framework with 22 participants of the 5-year HIV/AIDS strategy development for 2008-13 (West Java province) and 2007-11 (Bandung). We found that criteria for priority setting were used implicitly and that the strategies included a wide range of programmes. Many stakeholders were involved in the process but their contribution could be improved and particularly the public and people living with HIV/AIDS could be better engaged. The use of appeal and publicity mechanisms could be more transparent and formally stated. Public regulations are not yet installed to ensure fair priority setting. To increase fairness in HIV/AIDS priority setting, West Java should make improvements on all four conditions of the A4R framework. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine © The Author 2014; all rights reserved.

78 FR 43205 - Proposed Substances To Be Evaluated for Set 27 Toxicological Profiles

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-07-19

.... The Set 27 nomination process includes consideration of all substances on ATSDR's Priority List of... No. ATSDR-2013-0002] Proposed Substances To Be Evaluated for Set 27 Toxicological Profiles AGENCY...). ACTION: Request for comments on the proposed substances to be evaluated for Set 27 toxicological profiles...

Balancing equity and efficiency in the Dutch basic benefits package using the principle of proportional shortfall.

PubMed

van de Wetering, E J; Stolk, E A; van Exel, N J A; Brouwer, W B F

2013-02-01

Economic evaluations are increasingly used to inform decisions regarding the allocation of scarce health care resources. To systematically incorporate societal preferences into these evaluations, quality-adjusted life year gains could be weighted according to some equity principle, the most suitable of which is a matter of frequent debate. While many countries still struggle with equity concerns for priority setting in health care, the Netherlands has reached a broad consensus to use the concept of proportional shortfall. Our study evaluates the concept and its support in the Dutch health care context. We discuss arguments in the Netherlands for using proportional shortfall and difficulties in transitioning from principle to practice. In doing so, we address universal issues leading to a systematic consideration of equity concerns for priority setting in health care. The article thus has relevance to all countries struggling with the formalization of equity concerns for priority setting.

Public involvement in the priority setting activities of a wait time management initiative: a qualitative case study.

PubMed

Bruni, Rebecca A; Laupacis, Andreas; Levinson, Wendy; Martin, Douglas K

2007-11-16

As no health system can afford to provide all possible services and treatments for the people it serves, each system must set priorities. Priority setting decision makers are increasingly involving the public in policy making. This study focuses on public engagement in a key priority setting context that plagues every health system around the world: wait list management. The purpose of this study is to describe and evaluate priority setting for the Ontario Wait Time Strategy, with special attention to public engagement. This study was conducted at the Ontario Wait Time Strategy in Ontario, Canada which is part of a Federal-Territorial-Provincial initiative to improve access and reduce wait times in five areas: cancer, cardiac, sight restoration, joint replacements, and diagnostic imaging. There were two sources of data: (1) over 25 documents (e.g. strategic planning reports, public updates), and (2) 28 one-on-one interviews with informants (e.g. OWTS participants, MOHLTC representatives, clinicians, patient advocates). Analysis used a modified thematic technique in three phases: open coding, axial coding, and evaluation. The Ontario Wait Time Strategy partially meets the four conditions of 'accountability for reasonableness'. The public was not directly involved in the priority setting activities of the Ontario Wait Time Strategy. Study participants identified both benefits (supporting the initiative, experts of the lived experience, a publicly funded system and sustainability of the healthcare system) and concerns (personal biases, lack of interest to be involved, time constraints, and level of technicality) for public involvement in the Ontario Wait Time Strategy. Additionally, the participants identified concern for the consequences (sustainability, cannibalism, and a class system) resulting from the Ontario Wait Times Strategy. We described and evaluated a wait time management initiative (the Ontario Wait Time Strategy) with special attention to public engagement, and provided a concrete plan to operationalize a strategy for improving public involvement in this, and other, wait time initiatives.

Public involvement in the priority setting activities of a wait time management initiative: a qualitative case study

PubMed Central

Bruni, Rebecca A; Laupacis, Andreas; Levinson, Wendy; Martin, Douglas K

2007-01-01

Background As no health system can afford to provide all possible services and treatments for the people it serves, each system must set priorities. Priority setting decision makers are increasingly involving the public in policy making. This study focuses on public engagement in a key priority setting context that plagues every health system around the world: wait list management. The purpose of this study is to describe and evaluate priority setting for the Ontario Wait Time Strategy, with special attention to public engagement. Methods This study was conducted at the Ontario Wait Time Strategy in Ontario, Canada which is part of a Federal-Territorial-Provincial initiative to improve access and reduce wait times in five areas: cancer, cardiac, sight restoration, joint replacements, and diagnostic imaging. There were two sources of data: (1) over 25 documents (e.g. strategic planning reports, public updates), and (2) 28 one-on-one interviews with informants (e.g. OWTS participants, MOHLTC representatives, clinicians, patient advocates). Analysis used a modified thematic technique in three phases: open coding, axial coding, and evaluation. Results The Ontario Wait Time Strategy partially meets the four conditions of 'accountability for reasonableness'. The public was not directly involved in the priority setting activities of the Ontario Wait Time Strategy. Study participants identified both benefits (supporting the initiative, experts of the lived experience, a publicly funded system and sustainability of the healthcare system) and concerns (personal biases, lack of interest to be involved, time constraints, and level of technicality) for public involvement in the Ontario Wait Time Strategy. Additionally, the participants identified concern for the consequences (sustainability, cannibalism, and a class system) resulting from the Ontario Wait Times Strategy. Conclusion We described and evaluated a wait time management initiative (the Ontario Wait Time Strategy) with special attention to public engagement, and provided a concrete plan to operationalize a strategy for improving public involvement in this, and other, wait time initiatives. PMID:18021393

Strengthening expertise for health technology assessment and priority-setting in Africa

PubMed Central

Doherty, Jane E; Wilkinson, Thomas; Edoka, Ijeoma; Hofman, Karen

2017-01-01

ABSTRACT Background: Achieving sustainable universal health coverage depends partly on fair priority-setting processes that ensure countries spend scarce resources wisely. While general health economics capacity-strengthening initiatives exist in Africa, less attention has been paid to developing the capacity of individuals, institutions and networks to apply economic evaluation in support of health technology assessment and effective priority-setting. Objective: On the basis of international  lessons, to identify how research organisations and partnerships could contribute to capacity strengthening for health technology assessment and priority-setting in Africa. Methods: A rapid scan was conducted of international formal and grey literature and lessons extracted from the deliberations of two international and regional workshops relating to capacity-building for health technology assessment. ‘Capacity’ was defined in broad terms, including a conducive political environment, strong public institutional capacity to drive priority-setting, effective networking between experts, strong research organisations and skilled researchers. Results: Effective priority-setting requires more than high quality economic research. Researchers have to engage with an array of stakeholders, network closely other research organisations, build partnerships with different levels of government and train the future generation of researchers and policy-makers. In low- and middle-income countries where there are seldom government units or agencies dedicated to health technology assessment, they also have to support the development of an effective priority-setting process that is sensitive to societal and government needs and priorities. Conclusions: Research organisations have an important role to play in contributing to the development of health technology assessment and priority-setting capacity. In Africa, where there are resource and capacity challenges, effective partnerships between local and international researchers, and with key government stakeholders, can leverage existing skills and knowledge to generate a critical mass of individuals and institutions. These would help to meet the priority-setting needs of African countries and contribute to sustainable universal health coverage. PMID:29035166

Pharmaceutical priority setting and the use of health economic evaluations: a systematic literature review.

PubMed

Erntoft, Sandra

2011-06-01

To investigate which factors and criteria are used in priority setting of pharmaceuticals, in what contexts health economic evaluations are used, and barriers to the use of health economic evaluations at micro, meso, and macro health-care levels. The search for empirical articles was based on the MeSH index (Medical Substance Heading), including the search terms "economic evaluation," "cost-effectiveness analysis," "cost-utility analysis," "cost-benefit analysis," "pharmacoeconomic," AND "drug cost(s)," AND "eligibility determination," AND "decision-making," AND "rationing," AND formulary. The following databases were searched: PubMed, EconLit, Cochrane, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. More than 3100 studies were identified, 31 of which were included in this review. The use of health economic evaluations at all three health-care levels was investigated in three countries (United States [US], United Kingdom [UK], and Sweden). Postal and telephone survey methods dominated (n = 17) followed by interviews (n = 13), document analysis (n = 10), and observations of group deliberations (n = 9). The cost-effectiveness criterion was most important at the macro level. A number of contextual uses of health economic evaluations were identified, including importantly the legitimizing of decisions, structuring the priority-setting process, and requesting additional budgets to finance expensive pharmaceuticals. Factors that seem to support the increased use of health economic evaluations are well-developed frameworks for evaluations, the presence of health economic skills, and an explicit priority-setting process. Differences in how economic evaluations are used at macro, meso, and micro levels are attributed to differences in the preconditions at each level. Copyright © 2011 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Using Economic Evidence to Set Healthcare Priorities in Low‐Income and Lower‐Middle‐Income Countries: A Systematic Review of Methodological Frameworks

PubMed Central

Mitton, Craig; Doyle‐Waters, Mary M.; Drake, Tom; Conteh, Lesong; Newall, Anthony T.; Onwujekwe, Obinna; Jan, Stephen

2016-01-01

Abstract Policy makers in low‐income and lower‐middle‐income countries (LMICs) are increasingly looking to develop ‘evidence‐based’ frameworks for identifying priority health interventions. This paper synthesises and appraises the literature on methodological frameworks – which incorporate economic evaluation evidence – for the purpose of setting healthcare priorities in LMICs. A systematic search of Embase, MEDLINE, Econlit and PubMed identified 3968 articles with a further 21 articles identified through manual searching. A total of 36 papers were eligible for inclusion. These covered a wide range of health interventions with only two studies including health systems strengthening interventions related to financing, governance and human resources. A little under half of the studies (39%) included multiple criteria for priority setting, most commonly equity, feasibility and disease severity. Most studies (91%) specified a measure of ‘efficiency’ defined as cost per disability‐adjusted life year averted. Ranking of health interventions using multi‐criteria decision analysis and generalised cost‐effectiveness were the most common frameworks for identifying priority health interventions. Approximately a third of studies discussed the affordability of priority interventions. Only one study identified priority areas for the release or redeployment of resources. The paper concludes by highlighting the need for local capacity to conduct evaluations (including economic analysis) and empowerment of local decision‐makers to act on this evidence. PMID:26804361

How Are Health Research Priorities Set in Low and Middle Income Countries? A Systematic Review of Published Reports

PubMed Central

McGregor, Skye; Henderson, Klara J.; Kaldor, John M.

2014-01-01

Background Priority setting is increasingly recognised as essential for directing finite resources to support research that maximizes public health benefits and drives health equity. Priority setting processes have been undertaken in a number of low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings, using a variety of methods. We undertook a critical review of reports of these processes. Methods and Findings We searched electronic databases and online for peer reviewed and non-peer reviewed literature. We found 91 initiatives that met inclusion criteria. The majority took place at the global level (46%). For regional or national initiatives, most focused on Sub Saharan Africa (49%), followed by East Asia and Pacific (20%) and Latin America and the Caribbean (18%). A quarter of initiatives aimed to cover all areas of health research, with a further 20% covering communicable diseases. The most frequently used process was a conference or workshop to determine priorities (24%), followed by the Child Health and Nutrition Initiative (CHNRI) method (18%). The majority were initiated by an international organization or collaboration (46%). Researchers and government were the most frequently represented stakeholders. There was limited evidence of any implementation or follow-up strategies. Challenges in priority setting included engagement with stakeholders, data availability, and capacity constraints. Conclusions Health research priority setting (HRPS) has been undertaken in a variety of LMIC settings. While not consistently used, the application of established methods provides a means of identifying health research priorities in a repeatable and transparent manner. In the absence of published information on implementation or evaluation, it is not possible to assess what the impact and effectiveness of health research priority setting may have been. PMID:25275315

Application of economic principles in healthcare priority setting.

PubMed

Bate, Angela; Mitton, Craig

2006-06-01

In healthcare, resources are often insufficient to meet all claims on them. In this respect, resources are considered scarce and have to be managed by prioritizing between competing claims. Economics as a discipline explicitly addresses this reality by acknowledging resource scarcity. However, the extent to which economics actually influences such prioritizing decisions in healthcare is unclear. The purpose of this paper is to review the use of economics in priority setting decision making. We outline the key principles of economics as they apply to priority setting and review the methods reported in the literature with respect to these. We find that these methods, even economic methods (e.g., those typically used in conducting economic evaluations such as cost-effectiveness analyses) do not tend to explicitly incorporate economic principles. We argue therefore that these methods, when applied to the context of priority setting, are not sufficient and that what is required is a broader framework that can incorporate the output from economic methods yet also be pragmatically applicable. We then go on to present an alternative approach - namely program budgeting and marginal analysis. Finally, we put forward our case for using program budgeting and marginal analysis in priority setting practice and set out some future research challenges.

42 CFR 416.43 - Conditions for coverage-Quality assessment and performance improvement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... and changes in its patient care. (c) Standard: Program activities. (1) The ASC must set priorities for... by the ASC. (2) Addresses the ASC's priorities and that all improvements are evaluated for...

Using Economic Evidence to Set Healthcare Priorities in Low-Income and Lower-Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review of Methodological Frameworks.

PubMed

Wiseman, Virginia; Mitton, Craig; Doyle-Waters, Mary M; Drake, Tom; Conteh, Lesong; Newall, Anthony T; Onwujekwe, Obinna; Jan, Stephen

2016-02-01

Policy makers in low-income and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) are increasingly looking to develop 'evidence-based' frameworks for identifying priority health interventions. This paper synthesises and appraises the literature on methodological frameworks--which incorporate economic evaluation evidence--for the purpose of setting healthcare priorities in LMICs. A systematic search of Embase, MEDLINE, Econlit and PubMed identified 3968 articles with a further 21 articles identified through manual searching. A total of 36 papers were eligible for inclusion. These covered a wide range of health interventions with only two studies including health systems strengthening interventions related to financing, governance and human resources. A little under half of the studies (39%) included multiple criteria for priority setting, most commonly equity, feasibility and disease severity. Most studies (91%) specified a measure of 'efficiency' defined as cost per disability-adjusted life year averted. Ranking of health interventions using multi-criteria decision analysis and generalised cost-effectiveness were the most common frameworks for identifying priority health interventions. Approximately a third of studies discussed the affordability of priority interventions. Only one study identified priority areas for the release or redeployment of resources. The paper concludes by highlighting the need for local capacity to conduct evaluations (including economic analysis) and empowerment of local decision-makers to act on this evidence. © 2016 The Authors. Health Economics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Accountable priority setting for trust in health systems--the need for research into a new approach for strengthening sustainable health action in developing countries.

PubMed

Byskov, Jens; Bloch, Paul; Blystad, Astrid; Hurtig, Anna-Karin; Fylkesnes, Knut; Kamuzora, Peter; Kombe, Yeri; Kvåle, Gunnar; Marchal, Bruno; Martin, Douglas K; Michelo, Charles; Ndawi, Benedict; Ngulube, Thabale J; Nyamongo, Isaac; Olsen, Oystein E; Onyango-Ouma, Washington; Sandøy, Ingvild F; Shayo, Elizabeth H; Silwamba, Gavin; Songstad, Nils Gunnar; Tuba, Mary

2009-10-24

Despite multiple efforts to strengthen health systems in low and middle income countries, intended sustainable improvements in health outcomes have not been shown. To date most priority setting initiatives in health systems have mainly focused on technical approaches involving information derived from burden of disease statistics, cost effectiveness analysis, and published clinical trials. However, priority setting involves value-laden choices and these technical approaches do not equip decision-makers to address a broader range of relevant values - such as trust, equity, accountability and fairness - that are of concern to other partners and, not least, the populations concerned. A new focus for priority setting is needed.Accountability for Reasonableness (AFR) is an explicit ethical framework for legitimate and fair priority setting that provides guidance for decision-makers who must identify and consider the full range of relevant values. AFR consists of four conditions: i) relevance to the local setting, decided by agreed criteria; ii) publicizing priority-setting decisions and the reasons behind them; iii) the establishment of revisions/appeal mechanisms for challenging and revising decisions; iv) the provision of leadership to ensure that the first three conditions are met.REACT - "REsponse to ACcountable priority setting for Trust in health systems" is an EU-funded five-year intervention study started in 2006, which is testing the application and effects of the AFR approach in one district each in Kenya, Tanzania and Zambia. The objectives of REACT are to describe and evaluate district-level priority setting, to develop and implement improvement strategies guided by AFR and to measure their effect on quality, equity and trust indicators. Effects are monitored within selected disease and programme interventions and services and within human resources and health systems management. Qualitative and quantitative methods are being applied in an action research framework to examine the potential of AFR to support sustainable improvements to health systems performance.This paper reports on the project design and progress and argues that there is a high need for research into legitimate and fair priority setting to improve the knowledge base for achieving sustainable improvements in health outcomes.

A strategy to improve priority setting in developing countries.

PubMed

Kapiriri, Lydia; Martin, Douglas K

2007-09-01

Because the demand for health services outstrips the available resources, priority setting is one of the most difficult issues faced by health policy makers, particularly those in developing countries. Priority setting in developing countries is fraught with uncertainty due to lack of credible information, weak priority setting institutions, and unclear priority setting processes. Efforts to improve priority setting in these contexts have focused on providing information and tools. In this paper we argue that priority setting is a value laden and political process, and although important, the available information and tools are not sufficient to address the priority setting challenges in developing countries. Additional complementary efforts are required. Hence, a strategy to improve priority setting in developing countries should also include: (i) capturing current priority setting practices, (ii) improving the legitimacy and capacity of institutions that set priorities, and (iii) developing fair priority setting processes.

Self-management priority setting and decision-making in adults with multimorbidity: A narrative review of literature

PubMed Central

Bratzke, Lisa C.; Muehrer, Rebecca J.; Kehl, Karen A.; Lee, Kyoung Suk; Ward, Earlise C.; Kwekkeboom, Kristine L.

2014-01-01

Objectives The purpose of this narrative review was to synthesize current research findings related to self-management, in order to better understand the processes of priority setting and decision-making in among adults with multimorbidity. Design A narrative literature review was undertaken, synthesizing findings from published, peer-reviewed empirical studies that addressed priority setting and/or decision-making in self-management of multimorbidity. Data sources A search of PubMed, PsychINFO, CINAHL and SocIndex databases was conducted from database inception through December 2013. References lists from selected empirical studies and systematic reviews were evaluated to identify any additional relevant articles. Review methods Full text of potentially eligible articles were reviewed and selected for inclusion if they described empirical studies that addressed priority setting or decision-making in self-management of multimorbidity among adults. Two independent reviewers read each selected article and extracted relevant data to an evidence table. Processes and factors and processes of multimorbidity self-management were identified and sorted into categories of priority setting, decision-making, and facilitators/barriers. Results Thirteen articles were selected for inclusion; most were qualitative studies describing processes, facilitators, and barriers of multimorbidity self-management. The findings revealed that patients prioritize a dominant chronic illness and re-prioritize over time as conditions and treatments change; that multiple facilitators (e.g. support programs) and barriers (e.g. lack of financial resources) impact individuals’ self-management priority setting and decision-making ability; as do individual beliefs, preferences, and attitudes (e.g., perceived personal control, preferences regarding treatment). Conclusions Health care providers need to be cognizant that individuals with multimorbidity engage in day-to-day priority setting and decision-making among their multiple chronic illnesses and respective treatments. Researchers need to develop and test interventions that support day-to-day priority setting and decision-making and improve health outcomes for individuals with multimorbidity. PMID:25468131

Self-management priority setting and decision-making in adults with multimorbidity: a narrative review of literature.

PubMed

Bratzke, Lisa C; Muehrer, Rebecca J; Kehl, Karen A; Lee, Kyoung Suk; Ward, Earlise C; Kwekkeboom, Kristine L

2015-03-01

The purpose of this narrative review was to synthesize current research findings related to self-management, in order to better understand the processes of priority setting and decision-making among adults with multimorbidity. A narrative literature review was undertaken, synthesizing findings from published, peer-reviewed empirical studies that addressed priority setting and/or decision-making in self-management of multimorbidity. A search of PubMed, PsychINFO, CINAHL and SocIndex databases was conducted from database inception through December 2013. References lists from selected empirical studies and systematic reviews were evaluated to identify any additional relevant articles. Full text of potentially eligible articles were reviewed and selected for inclusion if they described empirical studies that addressed priority setting or decision-making in self-management of multimorbidity among adults. Two independent reviewers read each selected article and extracted relevant data to an evidence table. Processes and factors of multimorbidity self-management were identified and sorted into categories of priority setting, decision-making, and facilitators/barriers. Thirteen articles were selected for inclusion; most were qualitative studies describing processes, facilitators, and barriers of multimorbidity self-management. The findings revealed that patients prioritize a dominant chronic illness and re-prioritize over time as conditions and treatments change; that multiple facilitators (e.g. support programs) and barriers (e.g. lack of financial resources) impact individuals' self-management priority setting and decision-making ability; as do individual beliefs, preferences, and attitudes (e.g., perceived personal control, preferences regarding treatment). Health care providers need to be cognizant that individuals with multimorbidity engage in day-to-day priority setting and decision-making among their multiple chronic illnesses and respective treatments. Researchers need to develop and test interventions that support day-to-day priority setting and decision-making and improve health outcomes for individuals with multimorbidity. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Priority setting for health in emerging markets.

PubMed

Glassman, Amanda; Giedion, Ursula; McQueston, Kate

2013-05-01

The use of health technology assessment research in emerging economies is becoming an increasingly important tool to determine the uses of health spending. As low- and middle-income countries' gross domestic product grows, the funding available for health has increased in tandem. There is growing evidence that comparative effectiveness research and cost-effectiveness can be used to improve health outcomes within a predefined financial space. The use of these evaluation tools, combined with a systematized process of priority setting, can help inform national and global health payers. This review of country institutions for health technology assessment illustrates two points: the efforts underway to use research to inform priorities are widespread and not confined to wealthier countries; and many countries' efforts to create evidence-based policy are incomplete and more country-specific research will be needed. Further evidence shows that there is scope to reduce these gaps and opportunity to support better incorporation of data through better-defined priority-setting processes.

Prevention and self-management interventions are top priorities for osteoarthritis systematic reviews.

PubMed

Jaramillo, Alejandra; Welch, Vivian A; Ueffing, Erin; Gruen, Russell L; Bragge, Peter; Lyddiatt, Anne; Tugwell, Peter

2013-05-01

To identify high-priority research questions for osteoarthritis systematic reviews with consideration of health equity and the social determinants of health (SDH). We consulted with experts and conducted a literature search to identify a priority-setting method that could be adapted to address the health equity and SDH. We selected the Global Evidence Mapping priority-setting method, and through consultations and consensus, we adapted the method to meet our objectives. This involves developing an evidence map of the existing systematic reviews on osteoarthritis; conducting one face-to-face workshop with patients and another one with clinicians, researchers, and patients; and conducting an online survey of patients to rank the top 10 research questions. We piloted the adapted method with the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group to set research priorities for osteoarthritis. Our focus was on systematic reviews: we identified 34 high-priority research questions for osteoarthritis systematic reviews. Prevention and self-management interventions, mainly diet and exercise, are top priorities for osteoarthritis systematic reviews. Evaluation against our predefined objectives showed that this method did prioritize SDH (50% of the research questions considered SDH). There were marked gaps: no high-priority topics were identified for access to care until patients had advanced disease-lifestyle changes once the disease was diagnosed. This method was felt feasible if conducted annually. We confirmed the utility of an adapted priority-setting method that is feasible and considers SDH. Further testing of this method is needed to assess whether considerations of health equity are prioritized and involve disadvantaged groups of the population. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The accountability for reasonableness approach to guide priority setting in health systems within limited resources--findings from action research at district level in Kenya, Tanzania, and Zambia.

PubMed

Byskov, Jens; Marchal, Bruno; Maluka, Stephen; Zulu, Joseph M; Bukachi, Salome A; Hurtig, Anna-Karin; Blystad, Astrid; Kamuzora, Peter; Michelo, Charles; Nyandieka, Lillian N; Ndawi, Benedict; Bloch, Paul; Olsen, Oystein E

2014-08-20

Priority-setting decisions are based on an important, but not sufficient set of values and thus lead to disagreement on priorities. Accountability for Reasonableness (AFR) is an ethics-based approach to a legitimate and fair priority-setting process that builds upon four conditions: relevance, publicity, appeals, and enforcement, which facilitate agreement on priority-setting decisions and gain support for their implementation. This paper focuses on the assessment of AFR within the project REsponse to ACcountable priority setting for Trust in health systems (REACT). This intervention study applied an action research methodology to assess implementation of AFR in one district in Kenya, Tanzania, and Zambia, respectively. The assessments focused on selected disease, program, and managerial areas. An implementing action research team of core health team members and supporting researchers was formed to implement, and continually assess and improve the application of the four conditions. Researchers evaluated the intervention using qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods. The values underlying the AFR approach were in all three districts well-aligned with general values expressed by both service providers and community representatives. There was some variation in the interpretations and actual use of the AFR in the decision-making processes in the three districts, and its effect ranged from an increase in awareness of the importance of fairness to a broadened engagement of health team members and other stakeholders in priority setting and other decision-making processes. District stakeholders were able to take greater charge of closing the gap between nationally set planning and the local realities and demands of the served communities within the limited resources at hand. This study thus indicates that the operationalization of the four broadly defined and linked conditions is both possible and seems to be responding to an actual demand. This provides arguments for the continued application and further assessment of the potential of AFR in supporting priority-setting and other decision-making processes in health systems to achieve better agreed and more sustainable health improvements linked to a mutual democratic learning with potential wider implications.

The accountability for reasonableness approach to guide priority setting in health systems within limited resources – findings from action research at district level in Kenya, Tanzania, and Zambia

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background Priority-setting decisions are based on an important, but not sufficient set of values and thus lead to disagreement on priorities. Accountability for Reasonableness (AFR) is an ethics-based approach to a legitimate and fair priority-setting process that builds upon four conditions: relevance, publicity, appeals, and enforcement, which facilitate agreement on priority-setting decisions and gain support for their implementation. This paper focuses on the assessment of AFR within the project REsponse to ACcountable priority setting for Trust in health systems (REACT). Methods This intervention study applied an action research methodology to assess implementation of AFR in one district in Kenya, Tanzania, and Zambia, respectively. The assessments focused on selected disease, program, and managerial areas. An implementing action research team of core health team members and supporting researchers was formed to implement, and continually assess and improve the application of the four conditions. Researchers evaluated the intervention using qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods. Results The values underlying the AFR approach were in all three districts well-aligned with general values expressed by both service providers and community representatives. There was some variation in the interpretations and actual use of the AFR in the decision-making processes in the three districts, and its effect ranged from an increase in awareness of the importance of fairness to a broadened engagement of health team members and other stakeholders in priority setting and other decision-making processes. Conclusions District stakeholders were able to take greater charge of closing the gap between nationally set planning and the local realities and demands of the served communities within the limited resources at hand. This study thus indicates that the operationalization of the four broadly defined and linked conditions is both possible and seems to be responding to an actual demand. This provides arguments for the continued application and further assessment of the potential of AFR in supporting priority-setting and other decision-making processes in health systems to achieve better agreed and more sustainable health improvements linked to a mutual democratic learning with potential wider implications. PMID:25142148

Setting Priorities for NIOSH Research

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Gallagher, Richard E.

1975-01-01

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is attempting to develop total programs of occupational safety and health protection. It has established research criteria and a priority system for evaluating the order of investigating suspect substances or agents based upon the expected gain of the health benefit. (Author/MW)

Setting priorities in health care organizations: criteria, processes, and parameters of success.

PubMed

Gibson, Jennifer L; Martin, Douglas K; Singer, Peter A

2004-09-08

Hospitals and regional health authorities must set priorities in the face of resource constraints. Decision-makers seek practical ways to set priorities fairly in strategic planning, but find limited guidance from the literature. Very little has been reported from the perspective of Board members and senior managers about what criteria, processes and parameters of success they would use to set priorities fairly. We facilitated workshops for board members and senior leadership at three health care organizations to assist them in developing a strategy for fair priority setting. Workshop participants identified 8 priority setting criteria, 10 key priority setting process elements, and 6 parameters of success that they would use to set priorities in their organizations. Decision-makers in other organizations can draw lessons from these findings to enhance the fairness of their priority setting decision-making. Lessons learned in three workshops fill an important gap in the literature about what criteria, processes, and parameters of success Board members and senior managers would use to set priorities fairly.

Identifying research priorities for health care priority setting: a collaborative effort between managers and researchers

PubMed Central

Smith, Neale; Mitton, Craig; Peacock, Stuart; Cornelissen, Evelyn; MacLeod, Stuart

2009-01-01

Background To date there has been relatively little published about how research priorities are set, and even less about methods by which decision-makers can be engaged in defining a relevant and appropriate research agenda. We report on a recent effort in British Columbia to have researchers and decision-makers jointly establish an agenda for future research into questions of resource allocation. Methods The researchers enlisted decision-maker partners from each of British Columbia's six health authorities. Three forums were held, at which researchers and decision-makers from various levels in the health authorities considered possible research areas related to three key focus areas: (1) generation and use of decision criteria and measurement of 'benefit' against such criteria; (2) identification of so-called 'disinvestment' opportunities; and (3) evaluation of the effectiveness of priority setting procedures. Detailed notes were taken from each forum and synthesized into a set of qualitative themes. Results Forum participants suggested that future research into healthcare priority setting would benefit from studies that were longitudinal, comparative, and/or interdisciplinary. As well, participants identified two broad theme areas in which specific research projects were deemed desirable. First, future research might usefully consider how formal priority setting and resource allocation projects are situated within a larger organizational and political context. Second, additional research efforts should be devoted to better understanding and improving the actual implementation of priority setting frameworks, particularly with respect to issues of change management and the resolution of impediments to action on recommendations for resource allocation. Conclusion We were able to validate the importance of initial areas posed to the group and observed emergence of additional concerns and directions of critical importance to these decision-makers at this time. It is likely that the results are broadly applicable to other healthcare contexts. The implementation of this research agenda in British Columbia will depend upon the ability of the researchers and decision-makers to develop particular projects that fit within the constraints of existing funding opportunities. The process of engagement itself had benefits in terms of connecting decision-makers with their peers and sparking increased interest in the use and refinement of priority setting frameworks. PMID:19754969

Setting research priorities by applying the combined approach matrix.

PubMed

Ghaffar, Abdul

2009-04-01

Priority setting in health research is a dynamic process. Different organizations and institutes have been working in the field of research priority setting for many years. In 1999 the Global Forum for Health Research presented a research priority setting tool called the Combined Approach Matrix or CAM. Since its development, the CAM has been successfully applied to set research priorities for diseases, conditions and programmes at global, regional and national levels. This paper briefly explains the CAM methodology and how it could be applied in different settings, giving examples and describing challenges encountered in the process of setting research priorities and providing recommendations for further work in this field. The construct and design of the CAM is explained along with different steps needed, including planning and organization of a priority-setting exercise and how it could be applied in different settings. The application of the CAM are described by using three examples. The first concerns setting research priorities for a global programme, the second describes application at the country level and the third setting research priorities for diseases. Effective application of the CAM in different and diverse environments proves its utility as a tool for setting research priorities. Potential challenges encountered in the process of research priority setting are discussed and some recommendations for further work in this field are provided.

Accelerating Research Impact in a Learning Health Care System

PubMed Central

Elwy, A. Rani; Sales, Anne E.; Atkins, David

2017-01-01

Background: Since 1998, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) has supported more rapid implementation of research into clinical practice. Objectives: With the passage of the Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act of 2014 (Choice Act), QUERI further evolved to support VHA’s transformation into a Learning Health Care System by aligning science with clinical priority goals based on a strategic planning process and alignment of funding priorities with updated VHA priority goals in response to the Choice Act. Design: QUERI updated its strategic goals in response to independent assessments mandated by the Choice Act that recommended VHA reduce variation in care by providing a clear path to implement best practices. Specifically, QUERI updated its application process to ensure its centers (Programs) focus on cross-cutting VHA priorities and specify roadmaps for implementation of research-informed practices across different settings. QUERI also increased funding for scientific evaluations of the Choice Act and other policies in response to Commission on Care recommendations. Results: QUERI’s national network of Programs deploys effective practices using implementation strategies across different settings. QUERI Choice Act evaluations informed the law’s further implementation, setting the stage for additional rigorous national evaluations of other VHA programs and policies including community provider networks. Conclusions: Grounded in implementation science and evidence-based policy, QUERI serves as an example of how to operationalize core components of a Learning Health Care System, notably through rigorous evaluation and scientific testing of implementation strategies to ultimately reduce variation in quality and improve overall population health. PMID:27997456

Establishing health systems financing research priorities in developing countries using a participatory methodology.

PubMed

Ranson, Kent; Law, Tyler J; Bennett, Sara

2010-06-01

Donor funding for health systems financing (HSF) research is inadequate and often poorly aligned with national priorities. This study aimed to generate consensus about a core set of research issues that urgently require attention in order to facilitate policy development. There were three key inputs into the priority setting process: key-informant interviews with health policy makers, researchers, community and civil society representatives across twenty-four low- and middle-income countries in four regions; an overview of relevant reviews to identify research completed to date; and inputs from 12 key informants (largely researchers) at a consultative workshop. Nineteen priority research questions emerged from key-informant interviews. The overview of reviews was instructive in showing which health financing topics have had comparatively little written about them, despite being identified as important by key informants. The questions ranked as most important at the consultative workshop were: It is hoped that this work on HSF research priorities will complement calls for increased health systems research and evaluation by providing specific suggestions as to where new and existing research resources can best be invested. The list of high priority HSF research questions is being communicated to research funders and researchers in order to seek to influence global patterns of HSF research funding and activity. A "bottom up" approach to setting global research priorities such as that employed here should ensure that priorities are more sensitive to user needs. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Global Conservation Priorities for Marine Turtles

PubMed Central

Wallace, Bryan P.; DiMatteo, Andrew D.; Bolten, Alan B.; Chaloupka, Milani Y.; Hutchinson, Brian J.; Abreu-Grobois, F. Alberto; Mortimer, Jeanne A.; Seminoff, Jeffrey A.; Amorocho, Diego; Bjorndal, Karen A.; Bourjea, Jérôme; Bowen, Brian W.; Briseño Dueñas, Raquel; Casale, Paolo; Choudhury, B. C.; Costa, Alice; Dutton, Peter H.; Fallabrino, Alejandro; Finkbeiner, Elena M.; Girard, Alexandre; Girondot, Marc; Hamann, Mark; Hurley, Brendan J.; López-Mendilaharsu, Milagros; Marcovaldi, Maria Angela; Musick, John A.; Nel, Ronel; Pilcher, Nicolas J.; Troëng, Sebastian; Witherington, Blair; Mast, Roderic B.

2011-01-01

Where conservation resources are limited and conservation targets are diverse, robust yet flexible priority-setting frameworks are vital. Priority-setting is especially important for geographically widespread species with distinct populations subject to multiple threats that operate on different spatial and temporal scales. Marine turtles are widely distributed and exhibit intra-specific variations in population sizes and trends, as well as reproduction and morphology. However, current global extinction risk assessment frameworks do not assess conservation status of spatially and biologically distinct marine turtle Regional Management Units (RMUs), and thus do not capture variations in population trends, impacts of threats, or necessary conservation actions across individual populations. To address this issue, we developed a new assessment framework that allowed us to evaluate, compare and organize marine turtle RMUs according to status and threats criteria. Because conservation priorities can vary widely (i.e. from avoiding imminent extinction to maintaining long-term monitoring efforts) we developed a “conservation priorities portfolio” system using categories of paired risk and threats scores for all RMUs (n = 58). We performed these assessments and rankings globally, by species, by ocean basin, and by recognized geopolitical bodies to identify patterns in risk, threats, and data gaps at different scales. This process resulted in characterization of risk and threats to all marine turtle RMUs, including identification of the world's 11 most endangered marine turtle RMUs based on highest risk and threats scores. This system also highlighted important gaps in available information that is crucial for accurate conservation assessments. Overall, this priority-setting framework can provide guidance for research and conservation priorities at multiple relevant scales, and should serve as a model for conservation status assessments and priority-setting for widespread, long-lived taxa. PMID:21969858

Setting healthcare priorities: a description and evaluation of the budgeting and planning process in county hospitals in Kenya

PubMed Central

Cleary, Susan; Molyneux, Sassy; English, Mike

2017-01-01

Abstract This paper describes and evaluates the budgeting and planning processes in public hospitals in Kenya. We used a qualitative case study approach to examine these processes in two hospitals in Kenya. We collected data by in-depth interviews of national level policy makers, hospital managers, and frontline practitioners in the case study hospitals (n = 72), a review of documents, and non-participant observations within the hospitals over a 7 month period. We applied an evaluative framework that considers both consequentialist and proceduralist conditions as important to the quality of priority-setting processes. The budgeting and planning process in the case study hospitals was characterized by lack of alignment, inadequate role clarity and the use of informal priority-setting criteria. With regard to consequentialist conditions, the hospitals incorporated economic criteria by considering the affordability of alternatives, but rarely considered the equity of allocative decisions. In the first hospital, stakeholders were aware of - and somewhat satisfied with - the budgeting and planning process, while in the second hospital they were not. Decision making in both hospitals did not result in reallocation of resources. With regard to proceduralist conditions, the budgeting and planning process in the first hospital was more inclusive and transparent, with the stakeholders more empowered compared to the second hospital. In both hospitals, decisions were not based on evidence, implementation of decisions was poor and the community was not included. There were no mechanisms for appeals or to ensure that the proceduralist conditions were met in both hospitals. Public hospitals in Kenya could improve their budgeting and planning processes by harmonizing these processes, improving role clarity, using explicit priority-setting criteria, and by incorporating both consequentialist (efficiency, equity, stakeholder satisfaction and understanding, shifted priorities, implementation of decisions), and proceduralist (stakeholder engagement and empowerment, transparency, use of evidence, revisions, enforcement, and incorporating community values) conditions. PMID:27679522

Setting healthcare priorities: a description and evaluation of the budgeting and planning process in county hospitals in Kenya.

PubMed

Barasa, Edwine W; Cleary, Susan; Molyneux, Sassy; English, Mike

2017-04-01

This paper describes and evaluates the budgeting and planning processes in public hospitals in Kenya. We used a qualitative case study approach to examine these processes in two hospitals in Kenya. We collected data by in-depth interviews of national level policy makers, hospital managers, and frontline practitioners in the case study hospitals (n = 72), a review of documents, and non-participant observations within the hospitals over a 7 month period. We applied an evaluative framework that considers both consequentialist and proceduralist conditions as important to the quality of priority-setting processes. The budgeting and planning process in the case study hospitals was characterized by lack of alignment, inadequate role clarity and the use of informal priority-setting criteria. With regard to consequentialist conditions, the hospitals incorporated economic criteria by considering the affordability of alternatives, but rarely considered the equity of allocative decisions. In the first hospital, stakeholders were aware of - and somewhat satisfied with - the budgeting and planning process, while in the second hospital they were not. Decision making in both hospitals did not result in reallocation of resources. With regard to proceduralist conditions, the budgeting and planning process in the first hospital was more inclusive and transparent, with the stakeholders more empowered compared to the second hospital. In both hospitals, decisions were not based on evidence, implementation of decisions was poor and the community was not included. There were no mechanisms for appeals or to ensure that the proceduralist conditions were met in both hospitals. Public hospitals in Kenya could improve their budgeting and planning processes by harmonizing these processes, improving role clarity, using explicit priority-setting criteria, and by incorporating both consequentialist (efficiency, equity, stakeholder satisfaction and understanding, shifted priorities, implementation of decisions), and proceduralist (stakeholder engagement and empowerment, transparency, use of evidence, revisions, enforcement, and incorporating community values) conditions. © The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

A GIS-BASED METHOD FOR MULTI-OBJECTIVE EVALUATION OF PARK VEGETATION. (R824766)

EPA Science Inventory

Abstract

In this paper we describe a method for evaluating the concordance between a set of mapped landscape attributes and a set of quantitatively expressed management priorities. The method has proved to be useful in planning urban green areas, allowing objectively d...

Research for better health: the Panamanian priority-setting experience and the need for a new process

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background Panama is, economically, the fastest growing country in Central America and is making efforts to improve management mechanisms for research and innovation. However, due to contextual factors, the Panamanian Health Research System is not well developed and is poorly coordinated with the Health System. Likewise, despite recent efforts to define a National Health Research Agenda, implementing this agenda and aligning it with Panamanians’ health needs remains difficult. This articles aims to review Panama’s experience in health research priority setting by analyzing the fairness of previous prioritization processes in order to promote an agreed-upon national agenda aligned with public health needs. Methods The three health research prioritization processes performed in Panama between 2006 and 2011 were analyzed based on the guidelines established by the four “Accountability for Reasonableness” principles, namely “relevance”, “publicity”, “revision”, and “enforcement”, which provide a framework for evaluating priority-setting fairness. Results The three health research priority-setting events performed in Panama during the reference period demonstrated a heterogeneous pattern of decision-making strategies, stakeholder group composition, and prioritization outcomes. None of the three analyzed events featured an open discussion process with the scientific community, health care providers, or civil society in order to reach consensus. Conclusions This investigation makes evident the lack of a strategy to encourage open discussion by the multiple stakeholders and interest groups that should be involved during the priority-setting process. The analysis reveals the need for a new priority-setting exercise that validates the National Agenda, promotes its implementation by the National Secretariat for Science, Technology and Innovation in conjunction with the Ministry of Health, and empowers multiple stakeholders; such an exercise would, in turn, favor the implementation of the agenda. PMID:25117661

Evaluation and Selection of Best Priority Sequencing Rule in Job Shop Scheduling using Hybrid MCDM Technique

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Kiran Kumar, Kalla; Nagaraju, Dega; Gayathri, S.; Narayanan, S.

2017-05-01

Priority Sequencing Rules provide the guidance for the order in which the jobs are to be processed at a workstation. The application of different priority rules in job shop scheduling gives different order of scheduling. More experimentation needs to be conducted before a final choice is made to know the best priority sequencing rule. Hence, a comprehensive method of selecting the right choice is essential in managerial decision making perspective. This paper considers seven different priority sequencing rules in job shop scheduling. For evaluation and selection of the best priority sequencing rule, a set of eight criteria are considered. The aim of this work is to demonstrate the methodology of evaluating and selecting the best priority sequencing rule by using hybrid multi criteria decision making technique (MCDM), i.e., analytical hierarchy process (AHP) with technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS). The criteria weights are calculated by using AHP whereas the relative closeness values of all priority sequencing rules are computed based on TOPSIS with the help of data acquired from the shop floor of a manufacturing firm. Finally, from the findings of this work, the priority sequencing rules are ranked from most important to least important. The comprehensive methodology presented in this paper is very much essential for the management of a workstation to choose the best priority sequencing rule among the available alternatives for processing the jobs with maximum benefit.

Patient and public engagement in priority setting: A systematic rapid review of the literature.

PubMed

Manafò, Elizabeth; Petermann, Lisa; Vandall-Walker, Virginia; Mason-Lai, Ping

2018-01-01

Current research suggests that while patients are becoming more engaged across the health delivery spectrum, this involvement occurs most often at the pre-preparation stage to identify 'high-level' priorities in health ecosystem priority setting, and at the preparation phase for health research. The purpose of this systematic rapid review of the literature is to describe the evidence that does exist in relation to patient and public engagement priority setting in both health ecosystem and health research. HealthStar (via OVID); CINAHL; Proquest Databases; and Scholar's Portal. i) published in English; ii) published within the timeframe of 2007-Current (10 years) unless the report/article was formative in synthesizing key considerations of patient engagement in health ecosystem and health research priority setting; iii) conducted in Canada, the US, Europe, UK, Australia/New Zealand, or Scandinavian countries. i) Is the research valid, sound, and applicable?; ii) what outcomes can we potentially expect if we implement the findings from this research?; iii) will the target population (i.e., health researchers and practitioners) be able to use this research?. A summary of findings from each of the respective processes was synthesized to highlight key information that would support decision-making for researchers when determining the best priority setting process to apply for their specific patient-oriented research. Seventy articles from the UK, US, Canada, Netherlands and Australia were selected for review. Results were organized into two tiers of public and patient engagement in prioritization: Tier 1-Deliberative and Tier 2-Consultative. Highly structured patient and public engagement planning activities include the James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnerships (UK), Dialogue Method (Netherlands), Global Evidence Mapping (Australia), and the Deep Inclusion Method/CHoosing All Together (US). The critical study limitations include challenges in comprehensively identifying the patient engagement literature for review, bias in article selection due to the identified scope, missed information due to a more limited use of exhaustive search strategies (e.g., in-depth hand searching), and the heterogeneity of reported study findings. The four public and patient engagement priority setting processes identified were successful in setting priorities that are inclusive and objectively based, specific to the priorities of stakeholders engaged in the process. The processes were robust, strategic and aimed to promote equity in patient voices. Key limitations identified a lack of evaluation data on the success and extent in which patients were engaged. Issues pertaining to feasibility of stakeholder engagement, coordination, communication and limited resources were also considered.

What do hospital decision-makers in Ontario, Canada, have to say about the fairness of priority setting in their institutions?

PubMed Central

Reeleder, David; Martin, Douglas K; Keresztes, Christian; Singer, Peter A

2005-01-01

Background Priority setting, also known as rationing or resource allocation, occurs at all levels of every health care system. Daniels and Sabin have proposed a framework for priority setting in health care institutions called 'accountability for reasonableness', which links priority setting to theories of democratic deliberation. Fairness is a key goal of priority setting. According to 'accountability for reasonableness', health care institutions engaged in priority setting have a claim to fairness if they satisfy four conditions of relevance, publicity, appeals/revision, and enforcement. This is the first study which has surveyed the views of hospital decision makers throughout an entire health system about the fairness of priority setting in their institutions. The purpose of this study is to elicit hospital decision-makers' self-report of the fairness of priority setting in their hospitals using an explicit conceptual framework, 'accountability for reasonableness'. Methods 160 Ontario hospital Chief Executive Officers, or their designates, were asked to complete a survey questionnaire concerning priority setting in their publicly funded institutions. Eight-six Ontario hospitals completed this survey, for a response rate of 54%. Six close-ended rating scale questions (e.g. Overall, how fair is priority setting at your hospital?), and 3 open-ended questions (e.g. What do you see as the goal(s) of priority setting in your hospital?) were used. Results Overall, 60.7% of respondents indicated their hospitals' priority setting was fair. With respect to the 'accountability for reasonableness' conditions, respondents indicated their hospitals performed best for the relevance (75.0%) condition, followed by appeals/revision (56.6%), publicity (56.0%), and enforcement (39.5%). Conclusions For the first time hospital Chief Executive Officers within an entire health system were surveyed about the fairness of priority setting practices in their institutions using the conceptual framework 'accountability for reasonableness'. Although many hospital CEOs felt that their priority setting was fair, ample room for improvement was noted, especially for the enforcement condition. PMID:15663792

Leadership and priority setting: the perspective of hospital CEOs.

PubMed

Reeleder, David; Goel, Vivek; Singer, Peter A; Martin, Douglas K

2006-11-01

The role of leadership in health care priority setting remains largely unexplored. While the management leadership literature has grown rapidly, the growing literature on priority setting in health care has looked in other directions to improve priority setting practices--to health economics and ethical approaches. Consequently, potential for improvement in hospital priority setting practices may be overlooked. A qualitative study involving interviews with 46 Ontario hospital CEOs was done to describe the role of leadership in priority setting through the perspective of hospital leaders. For the first time, we report a framework of leadership domains including vision, alignment, relationships, values and process to facilitate priority setting practices in health services' organizations. We believe this fledgling framework forms the basis for the sharing of good leadership practices for health reform. It also provides a leadership guide for decision makers to improve the quality of their leadership, and in so doing, we believe, the fairness of their priority setting.

Setting research priorities to improve the health of children and young people with neurodisability: a British Academy of Childhood Disability-James Lind Alliance Research Priority Setting Partnership

PubMed Central

Morris, Christopher; Simkiss, Doug; Busk, Mary; Morris, Maureen; Allard, Amanda; Denness, Jacob; Janssens, Astrid; Stimson, Anna; Coghill, Joanna; Robinson, Kelly; Fenton, Mark; Cowan, Katherine

2015-01-01

Objectives To engage young people, parent carers and clinicians in a systematic process to identify and prioritise research questions regarding ways to improve the health and well-being of children and young people with neurodisability. Design British Academy of Childhood Disability (BACD)-James Lind Alliance research priority setting partnership bringing together patients, carers and clinicians as equal stakeholders. Setting UK health service and community. Methods The BACD Strategic Research Group formed the partnership. A Steering Group was established; charity and professional partner organisations were recruited. Suggestions were gathered in an open survey and from research recommendations for statutory guidance. Items were aggregated to formulate indicative research questions and verified as uncertainties from research evidence. An interim survey was used to rank the questions to shortlist topics. A mixed group of stakeholders discussed the top 25 questions at the final priority setting workshop agreeing a final rank order and the top 10 research priorities. Participants Partner organisations were 13 charities and 8 professional societies. 369 people submitted suggestions (40% non-clinicians). 76 people participated in the interim prioritisation (26 parents, 1 young person, 10 charity representatives, 39 clinicians); 22 took part in the final workshop (3 young people, 7 parents, 3 charity representatives, 9 professionals). Results The top three research priorities related to (1) establishing the optimal frequency and intensity (dose) for mainstream therapies, (2) means for selecting and encouraging use of communication strategies and (3) ways to improve children's attitudes towards disability. The top 10 included evaluating interventions to promote mobility, self-efficacy, mental health, continence, physical fitness, educational inclusion and reduce impacts of sleep disturbance. Conclusions The methodology provided a systematic and transparent process to identify research priorities that included stakeholders that have typically not contributed to setting the research agenda. The top 10 and other topics identified provide a resource for researchers and agencies that fund research PMID:25631309

Seeking Signs of Life on Mars: The Importance of Sedimentary Suites as Part of Mars Sample Return

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

iMOST Team; Mangold, N.; McLennan, S. M.; Czaja, A. D.; Ori, G. G.; Tosca, N. J.; Altieri, F.; Amelin, Y.; Ammannito, E.; Anand, M.; Beaty, D. W.; Benning, L. G.; Bishop, J. L.; Borg, L. E.; Boucher, D.; Brucato, J. R.; Busemann, H.; Campbell, K. A.; Carrier, B. L.; Debaille, V.; Des Marais, D. J.; Dixon, M.; Ehlmann, B. L.; Farmer, J. D.; Fernandez-Remolar, D. C.; Fogarty, J.; Glavin, D. P.; Goreva, Y. S.; Grady, M. M.; Hallis, L. J.; Harrington, A. D.; Hausrath, E. M.; Herd, C. D. K.; Horgan, B.; Humayun, M.; Kleine, T.; Kleinhenz, J.; Mackelprang, R.; Mayhew, L. E.; McCubbin, F. M.; McCoy, J. T.; McSween, H. Y.; Moser, D. E.; Moynier, F.; Mustard, J. F.; Niles, P. B.; Raulin, F.; Rettberg, P.; Rucker, M. A.; Schmitz, N.; Sefton-Nash, E.; Sephton, M. A.; Shaheen, R.; Shuster, D. L.; Siljestrom, S.; Smith, C. L.; Spry, J. A.; Steele, A.; Swindle, T. D.; ten Kate, I. L.; Usui, T.; Van Kranendonk, M. J.; Wadhwa, M.; Weiss, B. P.; Werner, S. C.; Westall, F.; Wheeler, R. M.; Zipfel, J.; Zorzano, M. P.

2018-04-01

Sedimentary, and especially lacustrine, depositional environments are high-priority geological/astrobiological settings for Mars Sample Return. We review the detailed investigations, measurements, and sample types required to evaluate such settings.

Priority setting: what constitutes success? A conceptual framework for successful priority setting.

PubMed

Sibbald, Shannon L; Singer, Peter A; Upshur, Ross; Martin, Douglas K

2009-03-05

The sustainability of healthcare systems worldwide is threatened by a growing demand for services and expensive innovative technologies. Decision makers struggle in this environment to set priorities appropriately, particularly because they lack consensus about which values should guide their decisions. One way to approach this problem is to determine what all relevant stakeholders understand successful priority setting to mean. The goal of this research was to develop a conceptual framework for successful priority setting. Three separate empirical studies were completed using qualitative data collection methods (one-on-one interviews with healthcare decision makers from across Canada; focus groups with representation of patients, caregivers and policy makers; and Delphi study including scholars and decision makers from five countries). This paper synthesizes the findings from three studies into a framework of ten separate but interconnected elements germane to successful priority setting: stakeholder understanding, shifted priorities/reallocation of resources, decision making quality, stakeholder acceptance and satisfaction, positive externalities, stakeholder engagement, use of explicit process, information management, consideration of values and context, and revision or appeals mechanism. The ten elements specify both quantitative and qualitative dimensions of priority setting and relate to both process and outcome components. To our knowledge, this is the first framework that describes successful priority setting. The ten elements identified in this research provide guidance for decision makers and a common language to discuss priority setting success and work toward improving priority setting efforts.

Priority setting for orphan drugs: an international comparison.

PubMed

Rosenberg-Yunger, Zahava R S; Daar, Abdallah S; Thorsteinsdóttir, Halla; Martin, Douglas K

2011-04-01

To describe the process of priority setting for two orphan drugs - Cerezyme and Fabrazyme - in Canada, Australia and Israel, in order to understand and improve the process based on stakeholder perspectives. We conducted qualitative case studies of how three independent drug advisory committees made decisions relating to the funding of Cerezyme and Fabrazyme. Interviews were conducted with 22 informants, including committee members, patient groups and industry representatives. (1) DESCRIPTION: Orphan drugs reimbursement recommendations by expert panels were based on clinical evidence, cost and cost-effectiveness analysis. (2) EVALUATION: Committee members expressed an overall preference for the current drug review process used by their own committee, but were concerned with the fairness of the process particularly for orphan drugs. Other informants suggested the inclusion of other relevant values (e.g. lack of alternative treatments) in order to improve the priority setting process. Some patient groups suggested the use of an alternative funding mechanism for orphan drugs. Priority setting for drugs is not solely a technical process (involving cost-effective analysis, evidence-based medicine, etc.). Understanding the process by which reimbursement decisions are made for orphan drugs may help improve the system for future orphan drugs. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Hypertension management research priorities from patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers: A report from the Hypertension Canada Priority Setting Partnership Group.

PubMed

Khan, Nadia; Bacon, Simon L; Khan, Samia; Perlmutter, Sara; Gerlinsky, Carline; Dermer, Mark; Johnson, Lonni; Alves, Finderson; McLean, Donna; Laupacis, Andreas; Pui, Mandy; Berg, Angelique; Flowitt, Felicia

2017-11-01

Patient- and stakeholder-oriented research is vital to improving the relevance of research. The authors aimed to identify the 10 most important research priorities of patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers (family physicians, nurses, nurse practitioners, pharmacists, and dietitians) for hypertension management. Using the James Lind Alliance approach, a national web-based survey asked patients, caregivers, and care providers to submit their unanswered questions on hypertension management. Questions already answered from randomized controlled trial evidence were removed. A priority setting process of patient, caregiver, and healthcare providers then ranked the final top 10 research priorities in an in-person meeting. There were 386 respondents who submitted 598 questions after exclusions. Of the respondents, 78% were patients or caregivers, 29% lived in rural areas, 78% were aged 50 to 80 years, and 75% were women. The 598 questions were distilled to 42 unique questions and from this list, the top 10 research questions prioritized included determining the combinations of healthy lifestyle modifications to reduce the need for antihypertensive medications, stress management interventions, evaluating treatment strategies based on out-of-office blood pressure compared with conventional (office) blood pressure, education tools and technologies to improve patient motivation and health behavior change, management strategies for ethnic groups, evaluating natural and alternative treatments, and the optimal role of different healthcare providers and caregivers in supporting patients with hypertension. These priorities can be used to guide clinicians, researchers, and funding bodies on areas that are a high priority for hypertension management research for patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers. This also highlights priority areas for improved knowledge translation and delivering patient-centered care. ©2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Health care priority setting: principles, practice and challenges

PubMed Central

Mitton, Craig; Donaldson, Cam

2004-01-01

Background Health organizations the world over are required to set priorities and allocate resources within the constraint of limited funding. However, decision makers may not be well equipped to make explicit rationing decisions and as such often rely on historical or political resource allocation processes. One economic approach to priority setting which has gained momentum in practice over the last three decades is program budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA). Methods This paper presents a detailed step by step guide for carrying out a priority setting process based on the PBMA framework. This guide is based on the authors' experience in using this approach primarily in the UK and Canada, but as well draws on a growing literature of PBMA studies in various countries. Results At the core of the PBMA approach is an advisory panel charged with making recommendations for resource re-allocation. The process can be supported by a range of 'hard' and 'soft' evidence, and requires that decision making criteria are defined and weighted in an explicit manner. Evaluating the process of PBMA using an ethical framework, and noting important challenges to such activity including that of organizational behavior, are shown to be important aspects of developing a comprehensive approach to priority setting in health care. Conclusion Although not without challenges, international experience with PBMA over the last three decades would indicate that this approach has the potential to make substantial improvement on commonly relied upon historical and political decision making processes. In setting out a step by step guide for PBMA, as is done in this paper, implementation by decision makers should be facilitated. PMID:15104792

A systematic review of nursing research priorities on health system and services in the Americas.

PubMed

Garcia, Alessandra Bassalobre; Cassiani, Silvia Helena De Bortoli; Reveiz, Ludovic

2015-03-01

To systematically review literature on priorities in nursing research on health systems and services in the Region of the Americas as a step toward developing a nursing research agenda that will advance the Regional Strategy for Universal Access to Health and Universal Health Coverage. This was a systematic review of the literature available from the following databases: Web of Science, PubMed, LILACS, and Google. Documents considered were published in 2008-2014; in English, Spanish, or Portuguese; and addressed the topic in the Region of the Americas. The documents selected had their priority-setting process evaluated according to the "nine common themes for good practice in health research priorities." A content analysis collected all study questions and topics, and sorted them by category and subcategory. Of 185 full-text articles/documents that were assessed for eligibility, 23 were selected: 12 were from peer-reviewed journals; 6 from nursing publications; 4 from Ministries of Health; and 1 from an international organization. Journal publications had stronger methodological rigor; the majority did not present a clear implementation or evaluation plan. After compiling the 444 documents' study questions and topics, the content analysis resulted in a document with 5 categories and 16 subcategories regarding nursing research priorities on health systems and services. Research priority-setting is a highly important process for health services improvement and resources optimization, but implementation and evaluation plans are rarely included. The resulting document will serve as basis for the development of a new nursing research agenda focused on health systems and services, and shaped to advance universal health coverage and universal access to health.

Priority Setting in Government: Beyond the Magic Bullet.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bosin, Morris Robert

1992-01-01

Priority setting is examined from the perspective of planning practitioners operating in a major federal regulatory agency. Causes of ambivalence in setting priorities are considered, and ways to reduce ambivalence are suggested. Three models are proposed for setting priorities in the public sector. (SLD)

Reconciling patient and provider priorities for improving the care of critically ill patients: A consensus method and qualitative analysis of decision making.

PubMed

McKenzie, Emily; Potestio, Melissa L; Boyd, Jamie M; Niven, Daniel J; Brundin-Mather, Rebecca; Bagshaw, Sean M; Stelfox, Henry T

2017-12-01

Providers have traditionally established priorities for quality improvement; however, patients and their family members have recently become involved in priority setting. Little is known about how to reconcile priorities of different stakeholder groups into a single prioritized list that is actionable for organizations. To describe the decision-making process for establishing consensus used by a diverse panel of stakeholders to reconcile two sets of quality improvement priorities (provider/decision maker priorities n=9; patient/family priorities n=19) into a single prioritized list. We employed a modified Delphi process with a diverse group of panellists to reconcile priorities for improving care of critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Proceedings were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using qualitative content analysis to explore the decision-making process for establishing consensus. Nine panellists including three providers, three decision makers and three family members of previously critically ill patients. Panellists rated and revised 28 priorities over three rounds of review and reached consensus on the "Top 5" priorities for quality improvement: transition of patient care from ICU to hospital ward; family presence and effective communication; delirium screening and management; early mobilization; and transition of patient care between ICU providers. Four themes were identified as important for establishing consensus: storytelling (sharing personal experiences), amalgamating priorities (negotiating priority scope), considering evaluation criteria and having a priority champion. Our study demonstrates the feasibility of incorporating families of patients into a multistakeholder prioritization exercise. The approach described can be used to guide consensus building and reconcile priorities of diverse stakeholder groups. © 2017 The Authors Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

From papers to practices: district level priority setting processes and criteria for family planning, maternal, newborn and child health interventions in Tanzania.

PubMed

Chitama, Dereck; Baltussen, Rob; Ketting, Evert; Kamazima, Switbert; Nswilla, Anna; Mujinja, Phares G M

2011-10-21

Successful priority setting is increasingly known to be an important aspect in achieving better family planning, maternal, newborn and child health (FMNCH) outcomes in developing countries. However, far too little attention has been paid to capturing and analysing the priority setting processes and criteria for FMNCH at district level. This paper seeks to capture and analyse the priority setting processes and criteria for FMNCH at district level in Tanzania. Specifically, we assess the FMNCH actor's engagement and understanding, the criteria used in decision making and the way criteria are identified, the information or evidence and tools used to prioritize FMNCH interventions at district level in Tanzania. We conducted an exploratory study mixing both qualitative and quantitative methods to capture and analyse the priority setting for FMNCH at district level, and identify the criteria for priority setting. We purposively sampled the participants to be included in the study. We collected the data using the nominal group technique (NGT), in-depth interviews (IDIs) with key informants and documentary review. We analysed the collected data using both content analysis for qualitative data and correlation analysis for quantitative data. We found a number of shortfalls in the district's priority setting processes and criteria which may lead to inefficient and unfair priority setting decisions in FMNCH. In addition, participants identified the priority setting criteria and established the perceived relative importance of the identified criteria. However, we noted differences exist in judging the relative importance attached to the criteria by different stakeholders in the districts. In Tanzania, FMNCH contents in both general development policies and sector policies are well articulated. However, the current priority setting process for FMNCH at district levels are wanting in several aspects rendering the priority setting process for FMNCH inefficient and unfair (or unsuccessful). To improve district level priority setting process for the FMNCH interventions, we recommend a fundamental revision of the current FMNCH interventions priority setting process. The improvement strategy should utilize rigorous research methods combining both normative and empirical methods to further analyze and correct past problems at the same time use the good practices to improve the current priority setting process for FMNCH interventions. The suggested improvements might give room for efficient and fair (or successful) priority setting process for FMNCH interventions.

Priority setting: what constitutes success? A conceptual framework for successful priority setting

PubMed Central

Sibbald, Shannon L; Singer, Peter A; Upshur, Ross; Martin, Douglas K

2009-01-01

Background The sustainability of healthcare systems worldwide is threatened by a growing demand for services and expensive innovative technologies. Decision makers struggle in this environment to set priorities appropriately, particularly because they lack consensus about which values should guide their decisions. One way to approach this problem is to determine what all relevant stakeholders understand successful priority setting to mean. The goal of this research was to develop a conceptual framework for successful priority setting. Methods Three separate empirical studies were completed using qualitative data collection methods (one-on-one interviews with healthcare decision makers from across Canada; focus groups with representation of patients, caregivers and policy makers; and Delphi study including scholars and decision makers from five countries). Results This paper synthesizes the findings from three studies into a framework of ten separate but interconnected elements germane to successful priority setting: stakeholder understanding, shifted priorities/reallocation of resources, decision making quality, stakeholder acceptance and satisfaction, positive externalities, stakeholder engagement, use of explicit process, information management, consideration of values and context, and revision or appeals mechanism. Conclusion The ten elements specify both quantitative and qualitative dimensions of priority setting and relate to both process and outcome components. To our knowledge, this is the first framework that describes successful priority setting. The ten elements identified in this research provide guidance for decision makers and a common language to discuss priority setting success and work toward improving priority setting efforts. PMID:19265518

Global research priorities for interpersonal violence prevention: a modified Delphi study.

PubMed

Mikton, Christopher R; Tanaka, Masako; Tomlinson, Mark; Streiner, David L; Tonmyr, Lil; Lee, Bandy X; Fisher, Jane; Hegadoren, Kathy; Pim, Joam Evans; Wang, Shr-Jie Sharlenna; MacMillan, Harriet L

2017-01-01

To establish global research priorities for interpersonal violence prevention using a systematic approach. Research priorities were identified in a three-round process involving two surveys. In round 1, 95 global experts in violence prevention proposed research questions to be ranked in round 2. Questions were collated and organized according to the four-step public health approach to violence prevention. In round 2, 280 international experts ranked the importance of research in the four steps, and the various substeps, of the public health approach. In round 3, 131 international experts ranked the importance of detailed research questions on the public health step awarded the highest priority in round 2. In round 2, "developing, implementing and evaluating interventions" was the step of the public health approach awarded the highest priority for four of the six types of violence considered (i.e. child maltreatment, intimate partner violence, armed violence and sexual violence) but not for youth violence or elder abuse. In contrast, "scaling up interventions and evaluating their cost-effectiveness" was ranked lowest for all types of violence. In round 3, research into "developing, implementing and evaluating interventions" that addressed parenting or laws to regulate the use of firearms was awarded the highest priority. The key limitations of the study were response and attrition rates among survey respondents. However, these rates were in line with similar priority-setting exercises. These findings suggest it is premature to scale up violence prevention interventions. Developing and evaluating smaller-scale interventions should be the funding priority.

Global research priorities for interpersonal violence prevention: a modified Delphi study

PubMed Central

Tanaka, Masako; Tomlinson, Mark; Streiner, David L; Tonmyr, Lil; Lee, Bandy X; Fisher, Jane; Hegadoren, Kathy; Pim, Joam Evans; Wang, Shr-Jie Sharlenna; MacMillan, Harriet L

2017-01-01

Abstract Objective To establish global research priorities for interpersonal violence prevention using a systematic approach. Methods Research priorities were identified in a three-round process involving two surveys. In round 1, 95 global experts in violence prevention proposed research questions to be ranked in round 2. Questions were collated and organized according to the four-step public health approach to violence prevention. In round 2, 280 international experts ranked the importance of research in the four steps, and the various substeps, of the public health approach. In round 3, 131 international experts ranked the importance of detailed research questions on the public health step awarded the highest priority in round 2. Findings In round 2, “developing, implementing and evaluating interventions” was the step of the public health approach awarded the highest priority for four of the six types of violence considered (i.e. child maltreatment, intimate partner violence, armed violence and sexual violence) but not for youth violence or elder abuse. In contrast, “scaling up interventions and evaluating their cost–effectiveness” was ranked lowest for all types of violence. In round 3, research into “developing, implementing and evaluating interventions” that addressed parenting or laws to regulate the use of firearms was awarded the highest priority. The key limitations of the study were response and attrition rates among survey respondents. However, these rates were in line with similar priority-setting exercises. Conclusion These findings suggest it is premature to scale up violence prevention interventions. Developing and evaluating smaller-scale interventions should be the funding priority. PMID:28053363

Information technology and hospice palliative care: social, cultural, ethical and technical implications in a rural setting.

PubMed

Kuziemsky, Craig; Jewers, Heather; Appleby, Brenda; Foshay, Neil; Maccaull, Wendy; Miller, Keith; Macdonald, Madonna

2012-01-01

There is a need to better understand the specific settings in which health information technology (HIT) is used and implemented. Factors that will determine the successful implementation of HIT are context-specific and often reside not at the technical level but rather at the process and people level. This paper provides the results of a needs assessment for HIT to support hospice palliative care (HPC) delivery in rural settings. Roundtable discussions using the nominal group technique were done to identify priority issues regarding HIT usage to support rural HPC delivery. Qualitative content analysis was then used to identify sociotechnical themes from the roundtable data. Twenty priority issues were identified at the roundtable session. Content analysis grouped the priority issues into one central theme and five supporting themes to form a sociotechnical framework for patient-centered care in rural settings. There are several sociotechnical themes and associated issues that need to be considered prior to implementing HIT in rural HPC settings. Proactive evaluation of these issues can enhance HIT implementation and also help to make ethical aspects of HIT design more explicit.

Priority setting in clinical nursing practice: literature review.

PubMed

Hendry, Charles; Walker, Anne

2004-08-01

Time is a valuable resource. When nurses experience demands on their services which exceed their available time, then 'rationing' must occur. In clinical practice such rationing requires practitioners to set priorities for care. The aim of this paper is establish what is currently known about priority setting in nursing, including how nurses set priorities and what factors influence this. CINAHL, Medline, ASSIA, and PsychLit databases for the years 1982-2002 were searched, using the terms (clinical decision-making or problem-solving or planning) and (setting priorities or prioriti*). The publications found were used in a selective, descriptive review. Priority setting is an important skill in nursing, and a skill deficit can have serious consequences for patients. Recent studies have suggested that it is a difficult skill for newly qualified nurses to acquire and may not be given sufficient attention in nurse education. Priority setting can be defined as the ordering of nursing problems using notions of urgency and/or importance, in order to establish a preferential order for nursing actions. A number of factors that may impact on priority setting have been identified in the literature. These include: the expertise of the nurse; the patient's condition; the availability of resources; ward organization; philosophies and models of care; the nurse-patient relationship; and the cognitive strategy used by the nurse to set priorities. However, very little empirical work has been conducted in this area. Further study of priority setting in a range of clinical practice settings is necessary. This could inform both practice and education, promote better use of limited resources and maximize patient outcomes.

Effective Planning, Delegating, and Priority Setting.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

St. John, Walter

1982-01-01

Offers advice to administrators for increasing their effectiveness in an era of shrinking resources. Stresses the necessity for careful planning, delegation of tasks, and setting of priorities. Includes a guide for setting priorities and a priority planning chart. (WD)

Institutional considerations in priority setting: transactions cost perspective on PBMA.

PubMed

Jan, S

2000-10-01

Programme budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA) is increasingly being used as a method of priority setting in the health care sector. Despite this, PBMA has, on occasions, been subject to problems in its application which can be seen as being 'institutional' in nature. This paper examines the extent to which the institutional setting of PBMA affects the way in which it can be conducted. In particular, a transactions costs perspective is taken to analyse the extent to which variation in such costs can alter the incentives of the individual participants. A number of recommendations for improving the sustainability of such projects is then provided. Following this, the implications which this 'institutional' approach has for the evaluation of PBMA are set out.

Patient and public engagement in priority setting: A systematic rapid review of the literature

PubMed Central

Vandall-Walker, Virginia; Mason-Lai, Ping

2018-01-01

Background Current research suggests that while patients are becoming more engaged across the health delivery spectrum, this involvement occurs most often at the pre-preparation stage to identify ‘high-level’ priorities in health ecosystem priority setting, and at the preparation phase for health research. Objective The purpose of this systematic rapid review of the literature is to describe the evidence that does exist in relation to patient and public engagement priority setting in both health ecosystem and health research. Data sources HealthStar (via OVID); CINAHL; Proquest Databases; and Scholar’s Portal. Study eligibility criteria i) published in English; ii) published within the timeframe of 2007—Current (10 years) unless the report/article was formative in synthesizing key considerations of patient engagement in health ecosystem and health research priority setting; iii) conducted in Canada, the US, Europe, UK, Australia/New Zealand, or Scandinavian countries. Study appraisal and synthesis i) Is the research valid, sound, and applicable?; ii) what outcomes can we potentially expect if we implement the findings from this research?; iii) will the target population (i.e., health researchers and practitioners) be able to use this research?. A summary of findings from each of the respective processes was synthesized to highlight key information that would support decision-making for researchers when determining the best priority setting process to apply for their specific patient-oriented research. Results Seventy articles from the UK, US, Canada, Netherlands and Australia were selected for review. Results were organized into two tiers of public and patient engagement in prioritization: Tier 1—Deliberative and Tier 2—Consultative. Highly structured patient and public engagement planning activities include the James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnerships (UK), Dialogue Method (Netherlands), Global Evidence Mapping (Australia), and the Deep Inclusion Method/CHoosing All Together (US). Limitations The critical study limitations include challenges in comprehensively identifying the patient engagement literature for review, bias in article selection due to the identified scope, missed information due to a more limited use of exhaustive search strategies (e.g., in-depth hand searching), and the heterogeneity of reported study findings. Conclusion The four public and patient engagement priority setting processes identified were successful in setting priorities that are inclusive and objectively based, specific to the priorities of stakeholders engaged in the process. The processes were robust, strategic and aimed to promote equity in patient voices. Key limitations identified a lack of evaluation data on the success and extent in which patients were engaged. Issues pertaining to feasibility of stakeholder engagement, coordination, communication and limited resources were also considered. PMID:29499043

Economics of Obesity — Learning from the Past to Contribute to a Better Future

PubMed Central

Ananthapavan, Jaithri; Sacks, Gary; Moodie, Marj; Carter, Rob

2014-01-01

The discipline of economics plays a varied role in informing the understanding of the problem of obesity and the impact of different interventions aimed at addressing it. This paper discusses the causes of the obesity epidemic from an economics perspective, and outlines various justifications for government intervention in this area. The paper then focuses on the potential contribution of health economics in supporting resource allocation decision making for obesity prevention/treatment. Although economic evaluations of single interventions provide useful information, evaluations undertaken as part of a priority setting exercise provide the greatest scope for influencing decision making. A review of several priority setting examples in obesity prevention/treatment indicates that policy (as compared with program-based) interventions, targeted at prevention (as compared with treatment) and focused “upstream” on the food environment, are likely to be the most cost-effective options for change. However, in order to further support decision makers, several methodological advances are required. These include the incorporation of intervention costs/benefits outside the health sector, the addressing of equity impacts, and the increased engagement of decision makers in the priority setting process. PMID:24736685

Acceptable health and priority weighting: Discussing a reference-level approach using sufficientarian reasoning.

PubMed

Wouters, S; van Exel, N J A; Rohde, K I M; Vromen, J J; Brouwer, W B F

2017-05-01

Health care systems are challenged in allocating scarce health care resources, which are typically insufficient to fulfil all health care wants and needs. One criterion for priority setting may be the 'acceptable health' approach, which suggests that society may want to assign higher priority to health benefits in people with "unacceptable" than in people with "acceptable" health. A level of acceptable health then serves as a reference point for priority setting. Empirical research has indicated that people may be able and willing to define health states as "unacceptable" or "acceptable", but little attention has been given to the normative implications of evaluating health benefits in relation to a reference level of acceptable health. The current paper aims to address this gap by relating insights from the distributive justice literature, i.e. the sufficientarian literature, to the acceptable health approach, as we argue that these approaches are related. We specifically focus on the implications of an 'acceptability' approach for priority weighting of health benefits, derived from sufficientarian reasoning and debates, and assess the moral implications of such weighting. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Designing and evaluating an interprofessional shared decision-making and goal-setting decision aid for patients with diabetes in clinical care--systematic decision aid development and study protocol.

PubMed

Yu, Catherine H; Stacey, Dawn; Sale, Joanna; Hall, Susan; Kaplan, David M; Ivers, Noah; Rezmovitz, Jeremy; Leung, Fok-Han; Shah, Baiju R; Straus, Sharon E

2014-01-22

Care of patients with diabetes often occurs in the context of other chronic illness. Competing disease priorities and competing patient-physician priorities present challenges in the provision of care for the complex patient. Guideline implementation interventions to date do not acknowledge these intricacies of clinical practice. As a result, patients and providers are left overwhelmed and paralyzed by the sheer volume of recommendations and tasks. An individualized approach to the patient with diabetes and multiple comorbid conditions using shared decision-making (SDM) and goal setting has been advocated as a patient-centred approach that may facilitate prioritization of treatment options. Furthermore, incorporating interprofessional integration into practice may overcome barriers to implementation. However, these strategies have not been taken up extensively in clinical practice. To systematically develop and test an interprofessional SDM and goal-setting toolkit for patients with diabetes and other chronic diseases, following the Knowledge to Action framework. 1. Feasibility study: Individual interviews with primary care physicians, nurses, dietitians, pharmacists, and patients with diabetes will be conducted, exploring their experiences with shared decision-making and priority-setting, including facilitators and barriers, the relevance of a decision aid and toolkit for priority-setting, and how best to integrate it into practice.2. Toolkit development: Based on this data, an evidence-based multi-component SDM toolkit will be developed. The toolkit will be reviewed by content experts (primary care, endocrinology, geriatricians, nurses, dietitians, pharmacists, patients) for accuracy and comprehensiveness.3. Heuristic evaluation: A human factors engineer will review the toolkit and identify, list and categorize usability issues by severity.4. Usability testing: This will be done using cognitive task analysis.5. Iterative refinement: Throughout the development process, the toolkit will be refined through several iterative cycles of feedback and redesign. Interprofessional shared decision-making regarding priority-setting with the use of a decision aid toolkit may help prioritize care of individuals with multiple comorbid conditions. Adhering to principles of user-centered design, we will develop and refine a toolkit to assess the feasibility of this approach.

Designing and evaluating an interprofessional shared decision-making and goal-setting decision aid for patients with diabetes in clinical care - systematic decision aid development and study protocol

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background Care of patients with diabetes often occurs in the context of other chronic illness. Competing disease priorities and competing patient-physician priorities present challenges in the provision of care for the complex patient. Guideline implementation interventions to date do not acknowledge these intricacies of clinical practice. As a result, patients and providers are left overwhelmed and paralyzed by the sheer volume of recommendations and tasks. An individualized approach to the patient with diabetes and multiple comorbid conditions using shared decision-making (SDM) and goal setting has been advocated as a patient-centred approach that may facilitate prioritization of treatment options. Furthermore, incorporating interprofessional integration into practice may overcome barriers to implementation. However, these strategies have not been taken up extensively in clinical practice. Objectives To systematically develop and test an interprofessional SDM and goal-setting toolkit for patients with diabetes and other chronic diseases, following the Knowledge to Action framework. Methods 1. Feasibility study: Individual interviews with primary care physicians, nurses, dietitians, pharmacists, and patients with diabetes will be conducted, exploring their experiences with shared decision-making and priority-setting, including facilitators and barriers, the relevance of a decision aid and toolkit for priority-setting, and how best to integrate it into practice. 2. Toolkit development: Based on this data, an evidence-based multi-component SDM toolkit will be developed. The toolkit will be reviewed by content experts (primary care, endocrinology, geriatricians, nurses, dietitians, pharmacists, patients) for accuracy and comprehensiveness. 3. Heuristic evaluation: A human factors engineer will review the toolkit and identify, list and categorize usability issues by severity. 4. Usability testing: This will be done using cognitive task analysis. 5. Iterative refinement: Throughout the development process, the toolkit will be refined through several iterative cycles of feedback and redesign. Discussion Interprofessional shared decision-making regarding priority-setting with the use of a decision aid toolkit may help prioritize care of individuals with multiple comorbid conditions. Adhering to principles of user-centered design, we will develop and refine a toolkit to assess the feasibility of this approach. PMID:24450385

[The Danish Debate on Priority Setting in Medicine--An Update].

PubMed

Pornak, S C; Raspe, H

2015-09-01

In the last years, the Danish debate about priority setting in medicine has gained new strength. This paper shows the main focuses of the current discussion based on a research of Danish primary literature. For the first time since the 1990s the Danish Council of Ethics has been involved with priority setting in medicine in a project running from 2011 to 2013. The Council emphasises the importance of legitimate processes and calls for visible values and criteria. A focus of the debate is how to deal with new expensive drugs. Politicians, physicians, health economists and the Council of Ethics have called for a national institution for priority setting in medicine. They have mainly looked to the Norwegian National Council for Priority Setting in Health Care and the British National Institute for Health and Care Excellence for inspiration. The Danish Government considered establishing a national institute for priority setting, but the plans were not put into practice. In the year 2012 a new national project was launched to create clinical guidelines. Danish doctors welcome the guidelines as a good basis for priority setting. Just like in earlier Danish priority setting debates, a coordinating institution is lacking to bundle the discussion and keep it going. The debate seems to have come to an end once again. The fact that it was seriously considered to establish an institute for priority setting is a new development. It can be expected that the discussion will be resumed in the near future, possibly the idea of an institute for priority setting will be readopted. The general conditions for priority setting in health care have improved. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Research priority setting in childhood chronic disease: a systematic review.

PubMed

Odgers, Harrison Lindsay; Tong, Allison; Lopez-Vargas, Pamela; Davidson, Andrew; Jaffe, Adam; McKenzie, Anne; Pinkerton, Ross; Wake, Melissa; Richmond, Peter; Crowe, Sally; Caldwell, Patrina Ha Yuen; Hill, Sophie; Couper, Jennifer; Haddad, Suzy; Kassai, Behrouz; Craig, Jonathan C

2018-04-11

To evaluate research priority setting approaches in childhood chronic diseases and to describe the priorities of stakeholders including patients, caregivers/families and health professionals. We conducted a systematic review of MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL from inception to 16 October 2016. Studies that elicited stakeholder priorities for paediatric chronic disease research were eligible for inclusion. Data on the prioritisation process were extracted using an appraisal checklist. Generated priorities were collated into common topic areas. We identified 83 studies (n=15 722). Twenty (24%) studies involved parents/caregivers and four (5%) children. The top three health areas were cancer (11%), neurology (8%) and endocrine/metabolism (8%). Priority topic areas were treatment (78%), disease trajectory (48%), quality of life/psychosocial impact (48%), disease onset/prevention (43%), knowledge/self-management (33%), prevalence (30%), diagnostic methods (28%), access to healthcare (25%) and transition to adulthood (12%). The methods included workshops, Delphi techniques, surveys and focus groups/interviews. Specific methods for collecting and prioritising research topics were described in only 60% of studies. Most reviewed studies were conducted in high-income nations. Research priority setting activities in paediatric chronic disease cover many discipline areas and have elicited a broad range of topics. However, child/caregiver involvement is uncommon, and the methods often lack clarity. A systematic and explicit process that involves patients and families in partnership may help to inform a more patient and family-relevant research agenda in paediatric chronic disease. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Priority setting in guideline development: article 2 in Integrating and coordinating efforts in COPD guideline development. An official ATS/ERS workshop report.

PubMed

Atkins, David; Perez-Padilla, Rogelio; Macnee, William; Buist, A Sonia; Cruz, Alvaro A

2012-12-01

Professional societies, like many other organizations around the world, have recognized the need to use more rigorous processes to ensure that health care recommendations are informed by the best available research evidence. Priority setting is an essential component of developing clinical practice guidelines informed by the best available research evidence. It ensures that resources and attention are devoted to those areas in which clinical recommendations will provide the greatest benefit to patients, clinicians, and policy makers. This is the second of a series of 14 articles that methodologists and researchers from around the world prepared to advise guideline developers in respiratory and other diseases. This review focuses on priority setting, addressing five key questions. In this review, we addressed the following questions. (1) At which steps of guideline development should priorities be considered? (2) How do we create an initial list of potential topics within the guideline? (3) What criteria should be used to establish priorities? (4) What parties should be involved and what processes should be used to set priorities? (5)What are the potential challenges of setting priorities? We updated an existing review on priority setting, and searched PubMed and other databases of methodological studies for existing systematic reviews and relevant methodological research. We did not conduct systematic reviews ourselves. Our conclusions are based on available evidence, our own experience working with guideline developers, and workshop discussions. Existing literature on priority setting largely applies to identifying priorities for which guidelines to develop rather than setting priorities for recommendations within a guideline. Nonetheless, there is substantial consensus about the general factors that should be considered in setting priorities. These include the burdens and costs of illness, potential impact of a recommendation, identified deficits or weak points in practice, variation or uncertainty in practice, and availability of evidence. The input of a variety of stakeholders is useful in setting priorities, although informal consultation is used more often than formal methods. Processes for setting priorities remains poorly described in most guidelines.

Stakeholder views on criteria and processes for priority setting in Norway: a qualitative study.

PubMed

Aidem, Jeremy M

2017-06-01

Since 2013, Norway has engaged in political processes to revise criteria for priority setting. These processes have yielded key efficiency and equity criteria, but excluded potentially relevant social values. This study describes the views of 27 stakeholders in Norway's health system regarding a wider set of priority-setting criteria and procedural characteristics. Between January and February 2016, semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted with a purposive sample of policymakers, hospital administrators, practitioners, university students and seniors. Improving health among low-socioeconomic-status groups was considered an important policy objective: some favored giving more priority to diseases affecting socioeconomically disadvantaged groups, and some believed inequalities in health could be more effectively addressed outside the health sector. Age was not widely accepted as an independent criterion, but deemed relevant as an indicator of capacity to benefit, cost-effectiveness and health loss. Cost-effectiveness, severity and health-loss measures were judged relevant to policymaking, but cost-effectiveness and health loss were considered less influential to clinical decision-making. Public engagement was seen as essential yet complicated by media and stakeholder pressures. This study highlights how views on the relevance and implementation of criteria can vary significantly according to the health system level being evaluated. Further, the findings suggest that giving priority to socioeconomically disadvantaged groups and reducing inequalities in health may be relevant preferences not captured in recent policy proposals. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Cost-effective priorities for global mammal conservation.

PubMed

Carwardine, Josie; Wilson, Kerrie A; Ceballos, Gerardo; Ehrlich, Paul R; Naidoo, Robin; Iwamura, Takuya; Hajkowicz, Stefan A; Possingham, Hugh P

2008-08-12

Global biodiversity priority setting underpins the strategic allocation of conservation funds. In identifying the first comprehensive set of global priority areas for mammals, Ceballos et al. [Ceballos G, Ehrlich PR, Soberón J, Salazar I, Fay JP (2005) Science 309:603-607] found much potential for conflict between conservation and agricultural human activity. This is not surprising because, like other global priority-setting approaches, they set priorities without socioeconomic objectives. Here we present a priority-setting framework that seeks to minimize the conflicts and opportunity costs of meeting conservation goals. We use it to derive a new set of priority areas for investment in mammal conservation based on (i) agricultural opportunity cost and biodiversity importance, (ii) current levels of international funding, and (iii) degree of threat. Our approach achieves the same biodiversity outcomes as Ceballos et al.'s while reducing the opportunity costs and conflicts with agricultural human activity by up to 50%. We uncover shortfalls in the allocation of conservation funds in many threatened priority areas, highlighting a global conservation challenge.

Priority setting and economic appraisal: whose priorities--the community or the economist?

PubMed

Green, A; Barker, C

1988-01-01

Scarce resources for health require a process for setting priorities. The exact mechanism chosen has important implications for the type of priorities and plans set, and in particular their relationship to the principles of primary health care. One technique increasingly advocated as an aid to priority setting is economic appraisal. It is argued however that economic appraisal is likely to reinforce a selective primary health care approach through its espousal of a technocratic medical model and through its hidden but implicit value judgements. It is suggested that urgent attention is needed to develop approaches to priority setting that incorporate the strengths of economic appraisal, but that are consistent with comprehensive primary health care.

Priority setting in the provincial health services authority: survey of key decision makers

PubMed Central

Teng, Flora; Mitton, Craig; MacKenzie, Jennifer

2007-01-01

Background In recent years, decision makers in Canada and elsewhere have expressed a desire for more explicit, evidence-based approaches to priority setting. To achieve this aim within health care organizations, knowledge of both the organizational context and stakeholder attitudes towards priority setting are required. The current work adds to a limited yet growing body of international literature describing priority setting practices in health organizations. Methods A qualitative study was conducted using in-depth, face-to-face interviews with 25 key decision makers of the Provincial Health Services Authority (PHSA) of British Columbia. Major themes and sub-themes were identified through content analysis. Results Priorities were described by decision makers as being set in an ad hoc manner, with resources generally allocated along historical lines. Participants identified the Strategic Plan and a strong research base as strengths of the organization. The main areas for improvement were a desire to have a more transparent process for priority setting, a need to develop a culture which supports explicit priority setting, and a focus on fairness in decision making. Barriers to an explicit allocation process included the challenge of providing specialized services for disparate patient groups, and a lack of formal training in priority setting amongst decision makers. Conclusion This study identified factors important to understanding organizational context and informed next steps for explicit priority setting for a provincial health authority. While the PHSA is unique in its organizational structure in Canada, lessons about priority setting should be transferable to other contexts. PMID:17565691

Exploring the challenge of health research priority setting in partnership: reflections on the methodology used by the James Lind Alliance Pressure Ulcer Priority Setting Partnership.

PubMed

Madden, Mary; Morley, Richard

2016-01-01

The James Lind Alliance (JLA) brings patients, carers and clinicians together in Priority Setting Partnerships (PSPs) to identify and prioritise shared uncertainties about the effects of treatment. The JLA emerged from the evidence-informed healthcare movement to address a concern that the research being carried out on treatment effectiveness is not that of most importance to patients and health professionals. In the JLA PSPs, 'hard' evidence-informed ideals meet 'soft' participatory practices. This article explores the challenges of putting co-production methods into practice by reflecting on the methods used by the JLA Pressure Ulcer PSP (JLAPUP). The JLA principles are transparency, inclusivity and avoiding waste in research. This means paying the same close critical attention to how PSPs are designed and run, as is desired in the health research which the JLA seeks to influence. JLAPUP showed that it was possible to work in partnership in a field where patients are often elderly, immobile, unrepresented and particularly unwell, many of whom are living with more than one long term condition. However, for those unfamiliar with it, 'uncertainty' was a difficult term to get to grips with. Also, it was harder for some people than others to take part and to have their voices heard and understood. In keeping with other PSPs, JLAPUP found that the nature and quality of research into pressure ulcer prevention and treatment did not reflect the priorities of those who took part. ᅟ. Studies identifying a mismatch between the priorities of academics and clinicians and those of people with direct experience of a health condition pose a challenge to the assumption that professional researchers can represent the interests of patients and the public in setting priorities for health research. The James Lind Alliance (JLA) brings patients, carers and clinicians together in Priority Setting Partnerships (PSPs) to identify and prioritise shared uncertainties about the effects of treatment. There is no formal evaluation yet to examine the different approaches used by individual PSPs and the impact these methods have on the quality of the partnership and subsequent outputs. There is no gold standard method for health research topic identification and priority setting and reporting on public involvement in this area is predominantly descriptive rather than evaluative. The JLA Pressure Ulcer PSP (JLAPUP) was developed and worked between 2009 and 2013 to identify and prioritise the top 10 'uncertainties' , or 'unanswered questions', about the effects of pressure ulcer interventions. JLAPUP identified a mismatch between the nature and quality of RCTs in pressure ulcer prevention and treatment and the kind of research evidence desired by patients or service users, carers and health professionals. Results and methods have been reported fully elsewhere. The consultative and deliberative methods used to establish health research priorities in PSPs are fundamentally interpretive. PSPs are therefore an arena in which 'hard' evidence-informed ideals meet 'soft' participatory practices. This article provides an account of the challenges faced in one particular PSP. We explain the rationale for the approaches taken, difficulties faced and the limitations at each stage, because these aspects are particularly under-reported. The JLAPUP case is used to identify possible areas for evaluation and reporting across PSPs. Engaging people with very different health and life experiences in the complexities of health science based discussions of uncertainty is challenging. This is particularly the case when engaging groups routinely excluded from participating in health research, for example, older people with multiple comorbidities. The JLA principles of transparency, inclusivity and avoiding waste in research require paying close critical attention to PSP methodology, including full evaluation and reporting of PSP processes and outcomes. Assessing the impact of PSPs is contingent on the decision making processes of commissioners and funders.

Research priority setting for integrated early child development and violence prevention (ECD+) in low and middle income countries: An expert opinion exercise.

PubMed

Tomlinson, Mark; Jordans, Mark; MacMillan, Harriet; Betancourt, Theresa; Hunt, Xanthe; Mikton, Christopher

2017-10-01

Child development in low and middle income countries (LMIC) is compromised by multiple risk factors. Reducing children's exposure to harmful events is essential for early childhood development (ECD). In particular, preventing violence against children - a highly prevalent risk factor that negatively affects optimal child development - should be an intervention priority. We used the Child Health and Nutrition Initiative (CHNRI) method for the setting of research priorities in integrated Early Childhood Development and violence prevention programs (ECD+). An expert group was identified and invited to systematically list and score research questions. A total of 186 stakeholders were asked to contribute five research questions each, and contributions were received from 81 respondents. These were subsequently evaluated using a set of five criteria: answerability; effectiveness; feasibility and/or affordability; applicability and impact; and equity. Of the 400 questions generated, a composite group of 50 were scored by 55 respondents. The highest scoring research questions related to the training of Community Health Workers (CHW's) to deliver ECD+ interventions effectively and whether ECD+ interventions could be integrated within existing delivery platforms such as HIV, nutrition or mental health platforms. The priority research questions can direct new research initiatives, mainly in focusing on the effectiveness of an ECD+ approach, as well as on service delivery questions. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic exercise of its kind in the field of ECD+. The findings from this research priority setting exercise can help guide donors and other development actors towards funding priorities for important future research related to ECD and violence prevention. Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Rural Clinician Evaluation of Children's Health Care Quality Measures: An Oregon Rural Practice-based Research Network (ORPRN) Study.

PubMed

Fagnan, Lyle J; Michaels, LeAnn; Ramsey, Katrina; Shearer, Stefan; Droppers, Oliver; Gallia, Charles

2015-01-01

Responding to quality metrics is an accepted and expected component of the current health care environment. Little is known about which measures physicians identify as a priority when reporting the quality of care to their patients, especially the care of children in rural settings. The objective of this study is for physicians caring for children in rural communities to identify which of the initial core sets of 24 child health quality measures are useful and are a priority for reporting and improving care. A survey was sent to rural Oregon physicians who provide care to children. Of 955 eligible physicians, 172 (18%) completed the survey. The majority of respondents were family physicians (84%), and most respondents (58%) were in private practice. The child health measures stratified into 3 priority tiers: high, medium, and low priority. The top-tier priority measures included childhood immunization status, well-child visits, adolescent immunization status, body mass index assessment, and developmental screening. Dental treatment services, adequate prenatal care, and lower-birth-weight infants were among the lower-tier measures. The priority measures identified by rural family physicians reflect the relevance of the selected measures to their daily practice responsibilities, with missed opportunities to improve community health. © Copyright 2015 by the American Board of Family Medicine.

Evaluation of the priority heuristic as a descriptive model of risky decision making: comment on Brandstätter, Gigerenzer, and Hertwig (2006).

PubMed

Birnbaum, Michael H

2008-01-01

E. Brandstätter, G. Gigerenzer, and R. Hertwig (2006) contended that their priority heuristic, a type of lexicographic semiorder model, is more accurate than cumulative prospect theory (CPT) or transfer of attention exchange (TAX) models in describing risky decisions. However, there are 4 problems with their argument. First, their heuristic is not descriptive of certain data that they did not review. Second, their analysis relied on a global index of fit, percentage of correct predictions of the modal choice. Such analyses can lead to wrong conclusions when parameters are not properly estimated from the data. When parameters are estimated from the data, CPT and TAX fit the D. Kahneman and A. Tversky (1979) data perfectly. Reanalysis shows that TAX and CPT do as well as the priority heuristic for 2 of the data sets reviewed and outperform the priority heuristic for the other 3. Third, when 2 of these sets of data are reexamined, the priority heuristic is seen to make systematic violations. Fourth, new critical implications have been devised for testing the family of lexicographic semiorders including the priority heuristic; new results with these critical tests show systematic evidence against lexicographic semiorder models. (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved

Setting and meeting priorities in Indigenous health research in Australia and its application in the Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal health.

PubMed

Monk, Johanna M; Rowley, Kevin G; Anderson, Ian Ps

2009-11-20

Priority setting is about making decisions. Key issues faced during priority setting processes include identifying who makes these decisions, who sets the criteria, and who benefits. The paper reviews the literature and history around priority setting in research, particularly in Aboriginal health research. We explore these issues through a case study of the Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal Health (CRCAH)'s experience in setting and meeting priorities.Historically, researchers have made decisions about what research gets done. Pressures of growing competition for research funds and an increased public interest in research have led to demands that appropriate consultation with stakeholders is conducted and that research is of benefit to the wider society. Within Australian Aboriginal communities, these demands extend to Aboriginal control of research to ensure that Aboriginal priorities are met.In response to these demands, research priorities are usually agreed in consultation with stakeholders at an institutional level and researchers are asked to develop relevant proposals at a project level. The CRCAH's experience in funding rounds was that scientific merit was given more weight than stakeholders' priorities and did not necessarily result in research that met these priorities. After reviewing these processes in 2004, the CRCAH identified a new facilitated development approach. In this revised approach, the setting of institutional priorities is integrated with the development of projects in a way that ensures the research reflects stakeholder priorities.This process puts emphasis on identifying projects that reflect priorities prior to developing the quality of the research, rather than assessing the relevance to priorities and quality concurrently. Part of the CRCAH approach is the employment of Program Managers who ensure that stakeholder priorities are met in the development of research projects. This has enabled researchers and stakeholders to come together to collaboratively develop priority-driven research. Involvement by both groups in project development has been found to be essential in making decisions that will lead to robust and useful research.

Setting Priorities: Personal Values, Organizational Results. Ideas into Action Guidebooks

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Cartwright, Talula

2007-01-01

Successful leaders get results. To get results, you need to set priorities. This book can help you do a better job of setting priorities, recognizing the personal values that motivate your decision making, the probable trade-offs and consequences of your decisions, and the importance of aligning your priorities with your organization's…

Setting research priorities to improve the health of children and young people with neurodisability: a British Academy of Childhood Disability-James Lind Alliance Research Priority Setting Partnership.

PubMed

Morris, Christopher; Simkiss, Doug; Busk, Mary; Morris, Maureen; Allard, Amanda; Denness, Jacob; Janssens, Astrid; Stimson, Anna; Coghill, Joanna; Robinson, Kelly; Fenton, Mark; Cowan, Katherine

2015-01-28

To engage young people, parent carers and clinicians in a systematic process to identify and prioritise research questions regarding ways to improve the health and well-being of children and young people with neurodisability. British Academy of Childhood Disability (BACD)-James Lind Alliance research priority setting partnership bringing together patients, carers and clinicians as equal stakeholders. UK health service and community. The BACD Strategic Research Group formed the partnership. A Steering Group was established; charity and professional partner organisations were recruited. Suggestions were gathered in an open survey and from research recommendations for statutory guidance. Items were aggregated to formulate indicative research questions and verified as uncertainties from research evidence. An interim survey was used to rank the questions to shortlist topics. A mixed group of stakeholders discussed the top 25 questions at the final priority setting workshop agreeing a final rank order and the top 10 research priorities. Partner organisations were 13 charities and 8 professional societies. 369 people submitted suggestions (40% non-clinicians). 76 people participated in the interim prioritisation (26 parents, 1 young person, 10 charity representatives, 39 clinicians); 22 took part in the final workshop (3 young people, 7 parents, 3 charity representatives, 9 professionals). The top three research priorities related to (1) establishing the optimal frequency and intensity (dose) for mainstream therapies, (2) means for selecting and encouraging use of communication strategies and (3) ways to improve children's attitudes towards disability. The top 10 included evaluating interventions to promote mobility, self-efficacy, mental health, continence, physical fitness, educational inclusion and reduce impacts of sleep disturbance. The methodology provided a systematic and transparent process to identify research priorities that included stakeholders that have typically not contributed to setting the research agenda. The top 10 and other topics identified provide a resource for researchers and agencies that fund research. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

The First Step in Prison Training Program Evaluation: A Model for Pinpointing Critical Needs

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Vicino, Frank L.; And Others

1977-01-01

The model allows for the determination of the severity of the training problems, thus leading naturally to problem priority and in addition a basis for evaluation design. Results from the use of the model, in an operational setting, are presented. (Author)

Research priority setting for health policy and health systems strengthening in Nigeria: the policymakers and stakeholders perspective and involvement.

PubMed

Uneke, Chigozie Jesse; Ezeoha, Abel Ebeh; Ndukwe, Chinwendu Daniel; Oyibo, Patrick Gold; Onwe, Friday; Aulakh, Bhupinder Kaur

2013-01-01

Nigeria is one of the low and middle income countries (LMICs) facing severe resource constraint, making it impossible for adequate resources to be allocated to the health sector. Priority setting becomes imperative because it guides investments in health care, health research and respects resource constraints. The objective of this study was to enhance the knowledge and understanding of policymakers on research priority setting and to conduct a research priority setting exercise. A one-day evidence-to-policy research priority setting meeting was held. The meeting participants included senior and middle level policymakers and key decision makers/stakeholders in the health sector in Ebonyi State southeastern Nigeria. The priorities setting meeting involved a training session on priority setting process and conduction of priority setting exercise using the essential national health research (ENHR) approach. The focus was on the health systems building blocks (health workforce; health finance; leadership/governance; medical products/technology; service delivery; and health information/evidence). Of the total of 92 policymakers invited 90(97.8%) attended the meeting. It was the consensus of the policymakers that research should focus on the challenges of optimal access to health products and technology; effective health service delivery and disease control under a national emergency situation; the shortfalls in the supply of professional personnel; and the issues of governance in the health sector management. Research priority setting exercise involving policymakers is an example of demand driven strategy in the health policymaking process capable of reversing inequities and strengthening the health systems in LMICs.

What do District Health Planners in Tanzania think about improving priority setting using 'Accountability for Reasonableness'?

PubMed Central

Mshana, Simon; Shemilu, Haji; Ndawi, Benedict; Momburi, Roman; Olsen, Oystein Evjen; Byskov, Jens; Martin, Douglas K

2007-01-01

Background Priority setting in every health system is complex and difficult. In less wealthy countries the dominant approach to priority setting has been Burden of Disease (BOD) and cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), which is helpful, but insufficient because it focuses on a narrow range of values – need and efficiency – and not the full range of relevant values, including legitimacy and fairness. 'Accountability for reasonableness' is a conceptual framework for legitimate and fair priority setting and is empirically based and ethically justified. It connects priority setting to broader, more fundamental, democratic deliberative processes that have an impact on social justice and equity. Can 'accountability for reasonableness' be helpful for improving priority setting in less wealthy countries? Methods In 2005, Tanzanian scholars from the Primary Health Care Institute (PHCI) conducted 6 capacity building workshops with senior health staff, district planners and managers, and representatives of the Tanzanian Ministry of Health to discussion improving priority setting in Tanzania using 'accountability for reasonableness'. The purpose of this paper is to describe this initiative and the participants' views about the approach. Results The approach to improving priority setting using 'accountability for reasonableness' was viewed by district decision makers with enthusiastic favour because it was the first framework that directly addressed their priority setting concerns. High level Ministry of Health participants were also very supportive of the approach. Conclusion Both Tanzanian district and governmental health planners viewed the 'accountability for reasonableness' approach with enthusiastic favour because it was the first framework that directly addressed their concerns. PMID:17997824

Economic evaluations of alcohol prevention interventions: Is the evidence sufficient? A review of methodological challenges.

PubMed

Hill, Sarah R; Vale, Luke; Hunter, David; Henderson, Emily; Oluboyede, Yemi

2017-12-01

Public health interventions have unique characteristics compared to health technologies, which present additional challenges for economic evaluation (EE). High quality EEs that are able to address the particular methodological challenges are important for public health decision-makers. In England, they are even more pertinent given the transition of public health responsibilities in 2013 from the National Health Service to local government authorities where new agents are shaping policy decisions. Addressing alcohol misuse is a globally prioritised public health issue. This article provides a systematic review of EE and priority-setting studies for interventions to prevent and reduce alcohol misuse published internationally over the past decade (2006-2016). This review appraises the EE and priority-setting evidence to establish whether it is sufficient to meet the informational needs of public health decision-makers. 619 studies were identified via database searches. 7 additional studies were identified via hand searching journals, grey literature and reference lists. 27 met inclusion criteria. Methods identified included cost-utility analysis (18), cost-effectiveness analysis (6), cost-benefit analysis (CBA) (1), cost-consequence analysis (CCA) (1) and return-on-investment (1). The review identified a lack of consideration of methodological challenges associated with evaluating public health interventions and limited use of methods such as CBA and CCA which have been recommended as potentially useful for EE in public health. No studies using other specific priority-setting tools were identified. Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Case Definitions, Diagnostic Algorithms, and Priorities in Encephalitis: Consensus Statement of the International Encephalitis Consortium

PubMed Central

Venkatesan, A.; Tunkel, A. R.; Bloch, K. C.; Lauring, A. S.; Sejvar, J.; Bitnun, A.; Stahl, J-P.; Mailles, A.; Drebot, M.; Rupprecht, C. E.; Yoder, J.; Cope, J. R.; Wilson, M. R.; Whitley, R. J.; Sullivan, J.; Granerod, J.; Jones, C.; Eastwood, K.; Ward, K. N.; Durrheim, D. N.; Solbrig, M. V.; Guo-Dong, L.; Glaser, C. A.; Sheriff, Heather; Brown, David; Farnon, Eileen; Messenger, Sharon; Paterson, Beverley; Soldatos, Ariane; Roy, Sharon; Visvesvara, Govinda; Beach, Michael; Nasci, Roger; Pertowski, Carol; Schmid, Scott; Rascoe, Lisa; Montgomery, Joel; Tong, Suxiang; Breiman, Robert; Franka, Richard; Keuhnert, Matt; Angulo, Fred; Cherry, James

2013-01-01

Background.Encephalitis continues to result in substantial morbidity and mortality worldwide. Advances in diagnosis and management have been limited, in part, by a lack of consensus on case definitions, standardized diagnostic approaches, and priorities for research. Methods.In March 2012, the International Encephalitis Consortium, a committee begun in 2010 with members worldwide, held a meeting in Atlanta to discuss recent advances in encephalitis and to set priorities for future study. Results.We present a consensus document that proposes a standardized case definition and diagnostic guidelines for evaluation of adults and children with suspected encephalitis. In addition, areas of research priority, including host genetics and selected emerging infections, are discussed. Conclusions.We anticipate that this document, representing a synthesis of our discussions and supported by literature, will serve as a practical aid to clinicians evaluating patients with suspected encephalitis and will identify key areas and approaches to advance our knowledge of encephalitis. PMID:23861361

Fire Use Planning

Treesearch

Tom Leuschen; Dale Wade; Paula Seamon

2001-01-01

The success of a fire use program is in large part dependent on a solid foundation set in clear and concise planning. The planning process results in specific goals and measurable objectives for fire application, provides a means of setting priorities, and establishes a mechanism for evaluating and refining the process to meet the desired future condition. It is an...

Setting priorities for EU healthcare workforce IT skills competence improvement.

PubMed

Li, Sisi; Bamidis, Panagiotis D; Konstantinidis, Stathis Th; Traver, Vicente; Car, Josip; Zary, Nabil

2017-04-01

A major challenge for healthcare quality improvement is the lack of IT skills and knowledge of healthcare workforce, as well as their ambivalent attitudes toward IT. This article identifies and prioritizes actions needed to improve the IT skills of healthcare workforce across the EU. A total of 46 experts, representing different fields of expertise in healthcare and geolocations, systematically listed and scored actions that would improve IT skills among healthcare workforce. The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative methodology was used for research priority-setting. The participants evaluated the actions using the following criteria: feasibility, effectiveness, deliverability, and maximum impact on IT skills improvement. The leading priority actions were related to appropriate training, integrating eHealth in curricula, involving healthcare workforce in the eHealth solution development, improving awareness of eHealth, and learning arrangement. As the different professionals' needs are prioritized, healthcare workforce should be actively and continuously included in the development of eHealth solutions.

Setting healthcare priorities in hospitals: a review of empirical studies

PubMed Central

Barasa, Edwine W; Molyneux, Sassy; English, Mike; Cleary, Susan

2015-01-01

Priority setting research has focused on the macro (national) and micro (bedside) level, leaving the meso (institutional, hospital) level relatively neglected. This is surprising given the key role that hospitals play in the delivery of healthcare services and the large proportion of health systems resources that they absorb. To explore the factors that impact upon priority setting at the hospital level, we conducted a thematic review of empirical studies. A systematic search of PubMed, EBSCOHOST, Econlit databases and Google scholar was supplemented by a search of key websites and a manual search of relevant papers’ reference lists. A total of 24 papers were identified from developed and developing countries. We applied a policy analysis framework to examine and synthesize the findings of the selected papers. Findings suggest that priority setting practice in hospitals was influenced by (1) contextual factors such as decision space, resource availability, financing arrangements, availability and use of information, organizational culture and leadership, (2) priority setting processes that depend on the type of priority setting activity, (3) content factors such as priority setting criteria and (4) actors, their interests and power relations. We observe that there is need for studies to examine these issues and the interplay between them in greater depth and propose a conceptual framework that might be useful in examining priority setting practices in hospitals. PMID:24604831

Process is the point: justice and human rights: priority setting and fair deliberative process.

PubMed

Gruskin, Sofia; Daniels, Norman

2008-09-01

Most people responsible for setting priorities in health have considerable expertise relevant to deciding how to use resources effectively and the kinds of improvements that should be emphasized. Most are also concerned with distributing improvements equitably. Accordingly, they often invoke human rights or principles of distributive justice to legitimize choices that create winners and losers. We propose an approach that draws on the strengths of both perspectives as a way to add legitimacy to efforts to set priorities in health. Our proposal provides a process for setting priorities but is not a formula or an algorithm for generating particular priorities. We propose an approach that would do away with the process through which priorities are set and decisions made, and suggest the value of a focus on the process of legitimizing these decisions.

Collection Evaluation and Acquisition Budgets: A Kaleidoscope in the Making.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Osburn, Charles B.

1992-01-01

Discusses library collection evaluation and its relationship to the acquisitions budget. Topics addressed include the publishing industry; library services that are more user centered; acquisition of versus access to sources of information and knowledge; the concept of value; library accountability; objectives and setting priorities; and levels of…

Managing healthcare budgets in times of austerity: the role of program budgeting and marginal analysis.

PubMed

Mitton, Craig; Dionne, Francois; Donaldson, Cam

2014-04-01

Given limited resources, priority setting or choice making will remain a reality at all levels of publicly funded healthcare across countries for many years to come. The pressures may well be even more acute as the impact of the economic crisis of 2008 continues to play out but, even as economies begin to turn around, resources within healthcare will be limited, thus some form of rationing will be required. Over the last few decades, research on healthcare priority setting has focused on methods of implementation as well as on the development of approaches related to fairness and legitimacy and on more technical aspects of decision making including the use of multi-criteria decision analysis. Recently, research has led to better understanding of evaluating priority setting activity including defining 'success' and articulating key elements for high performance. This body of research, however, often goes untapped by those charged with making challenging decisions and as such, in line with prevailing public sector incentives, decisions are often reliant on historical allocation patterns and/or political negotiation. These archaic and ineffective approaches not only lead to poor decisions in terms of value for money but further do not reflect basic ethical conditions that can lead to fairness in the decision-making process. The purpose of this paper is to outline a comprehensive approach to priority setting and resource allocation that has been used in different contexts across countries. This will provide decision makers with a single point of access for a basic understanding of relevant tools when faced with having to make difficult decisions about what healthcare services to fund and what not to fund. The paper also addresses several key issues related to priority setting including how health technology assessments can be used, how performance can be improved at a practical level, and what ongoing resource management practice should look like. In terms of future research, one of the most important areas of priority setting that needs further attention is how best to engage public members.

Setting research priorities for Type 1 diabetes.

PubMed

Gadsby, R; Snow, R; Daly, A C; Crowe, S; Matyka, K; Hall, B; Petrie, J

2012-10-01

Research priorities are often set by academic researchers or the pharmaceutical industry. The interests of patients, carers and clinicians may therefore be overlooked and research questions that matter may be neglected. The aims of this study were to collect uncertainties about the treatment of Type 1 diabetes from patients, carers and health professionals, and to collate and prioritize these uncertainties to develop a top 10 list of research priorities, using a structured priority-setting partnership of patients, carers, health professionals and diabetes organizations, as described by the James Lind Alliance. A partnership of interested organizations was set up, and from this a steering committee of 10 individuals was formed. An online and paper survey was used to identify uncertainties. These were collated, and the steering group carried out an interim priority-setting exercise with partner organizations. This group of uncertainties was then voted on to give a smaller list that went forward to the final priority-setting workshop. At this meeting, a final list of the top 10 research priorities was agreed. An initial 1141 uncertainties were described. These were reduced to 88 indicative questions, 47 of which went out for voting. Twenty-four were then taken forward to a final priority-setting workshop. This workshop resulted in a list of top 10 research priorities in Type 1 diabetes. We have shown that it is possible using the James Lind Alliance process to develop an agreed top 10 list of research priorities for Type 1 diabetes from health professionals, patients and carers. © 2012 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine © 2012 Diabetes UK.

Priority-setting for achieving universal health coverage

PubMed Central

Chalkidou, Kalipso; Glassman, Amanda; Marten, Robert; Vega, Jeanette; Tritasavit, Nattha; Gyansa-Lutterodt, Martha; Seiter, Andreas; Kieny, Marie Paule; Hofman, Karen; Culyer, Anthony J

2016-01-01

Abstract Governments in low- and middle-income countries are legitimizing the implementation of universal health coverage (UHC), following a United Nation’s resolution on UHC in 2012 and its reinforcement in the sustainable development goals set in 2015. UHC will differ in each country depending on country contexts and needs, as well as demand and supply in health care. Therefore, fundamental issues such as objectives, users and cost–effectiveness of UHC have been raised by policy-makers and stakeholders. While priority-setting is done on a daily basis by health authorities – implicitly or explicitly – it has not been made clear how priority-setting for UHC should be conducted. We provide justification for explicit health priority-setting and guidance to countries on how to set priorities for UHC. PMID:27274598

Setting global research priorities for developmental disabilities, including intellectual disabilities and autism

PubMed Central

Tomlinson, Mark; Yasamy, M. Taghi; Emerson, Eric; Officer, Alana; Richler, Diane; Saxena, Shekhar

2015-01-01

Objectives The prevalence of intellectual disabilities (ID) has been estimated at 10.4/1000 worldwide with higher rates among children and adolescents in lower income countries. The objective of this paper is to address research priorities for development disabilities, notably intellectual disabilities and autism, at the global level and to propose the more rational use of scarce funds in addressing this under-investigated area. Methods An expert group was identified and invited to systematically list and score research questions. They applied the priority setting methodology of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) to generate research questions and to evaluate them using a set of five criteria: answerability, feasibility, applicability and impact, support within the context and equity. Findings The results of this process clearly indicated that the important priorities for future research related to the need for effective and efficient approaches to early intervention, empowerment of families supporting a person with developmental disability and to address preventable causes of poor health in people with ID and autism. Conclusions For the public health and other systems to become more effective in delivering appropriate support to persons with developmental disabilities, greater (and more targeted) investment in research is required to produce evidence of what works consistent with international human rights standards. PMID:24397279

Formative Evaluation of the Behavior Change Components within a Colorado Weatherization Assistance Program

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Sandoval, Perla K.

A formative evaluation of behavior change elements of an ongoing Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) offered by the Energy Resource Center (E.R.C.) in Denver, CO was conducted. The WAP as administered by the E.R.C. in Colorado saves residents an average 15% of energy consumption (E.R.C., 2015). However, research suggests that adding behavioral components to WAPs could increase energy savings to 21-26% (Gregory, 1992; APPRAISE, 2002). The goal of this evaluation is to provide recommendations to E.R.C. for program changes using Community Based Social Marketing (CBSM) and Theory of Planned Behavior. The CBSM Step 1- Step 3 is the focus of this formative evaluation. This program evaluation has four components: 1) review of written materials, 2) interviews with staff, 3) surveys mailed to E.R.C. clients and 4) in-home observations conducted with E.R.C. clients. Results of this formative evaluation has 3 sections of behaviors recommended for future intervention high priority, mid priority, and low priority recommendations based on CBSM penetration, probability, and impact factors. Behaviors that are listed as high priority for E.R.C. Behavioral intervention are cold water washing, hang drying, setting back thermostats, and window coverings. Overall increase in staff engagement is also recommended to be pursued. Each staff level is also given recommendations on how to engage in behavior change interventions.

Evidence-informed capacity building for setting health priorities in low- and middle-income countries: A framework and recommendations for further research.

PubMed

Li, Ryan; Ruiz, Francis; Culyer, Anthony J; Chalkidou, Kalipso; Hofman, Karen J

2017-01-01

Priority-setting in health is risky and challenging, particularly in resource-constrained settings. It is not simply a narrow technical exercise, and involves the mobilisation of a wide range of capacities among stakeholders - not only the technical capacity to "do" research in economic evaluations. Using the Individuals, Nodes, Networks and Environment (INNE) framework, we identify those stakeholders, whose capacity needs will vary along the evidence-to-policy continuum. Policymakers and healthcare managers require the capacity to commission and use relevant evidence (including evidence of clinical and cost-effectiveness, and of social values); academics need to understand and respond to decision-makers' needs to produce relevant research. The health system at all levels will need institutional capacity building to incentivise routine generation and use of evidence. Knowledge brokers, including priority-setting agencies (such as England's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and Health Interventions and Technology Assessment Program, Thailand) and the media can play an important role in facilitating engagement and knowledge transfer between the various actors. Especially at the outset but at every step, it is critical that patients and the public understand that trade-offs are inherent in priority-setting, and careful efforts should be made to engage them, and to hear their views throughout the process. There is thus no single approach to capacity building; rather a spectrum of activities that recognises the roles and skills of all stakeholders. A range of methods, including formal and informal training, networking and engagement, and support through collaboration on projects, should be flexibly employed (and tailored to specific needs of each country) to support institutionalisation of evidence-informed priority-setting. Finally, capacity building should be a two-way process; those who build capacity should also attend to their own capacity development in order to sustain and improve impact.

Evidence-informed capacity building for setting health priorities in low- and middle-income countries: A framework and recommendations for further research

PubMed Central

Li, Ryan; Ruiz, Francis; Culyer, Anthony J; Chalkidou, Kalipso; Hofman, Karen J

2017-01-01

Priority-setting in health is risky and challenging, particularly in resource-constrained settings. It is not simply a narrow technical exercise, and involves the mobilisation of a wide range of capacities among stakeholders – not only the technical capacity to “do” research in economic evaluations. Using the Individuals, Nodes, Networks and Environment (INNE) framework, we identify those stakeholders, whose capacity needs will vary along the evidence-to-policy continuum. Policymakers and healthcare managers require the capacity to commission and use relevant evidence (including evidence of clinical and cost-effectiveness, and of social values); academics need to understand and respond to decision-makers’ needs to produce relevant research. The health system at all levels will need institutional capacity building to incentivise routine generation and use of evidence. Knowledge brokers, including priority-setting agencies (such as England’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and Health Interventions and Technology Assessment Program, Thailand) and the media can play an important role in facilitating engagement and knowledge transfer between the various actors. Especially at the outset but at every step, it is critical that patients and the public understand that trade-offs are inherent in priority-setting, and careful efforts should be made to engage them, and to hear their views throughout the process. There is thus no single approach to capacity building; rather a spectrum of activities that recognises the roles and skills of all stakeholders. A range of methods, including formal and informal training, networking and engagement, and support through collaboration on projects, should be flexibly employed (and tailored to specific needs of each country) to support institutionalisation of evidence-informed priority-setting. Finally, capacity building should be a two-way process; those who build capacity should also attend to their own capacity development in order to sustain and improve impact. PMID:28721199

Maternal and perinatal health research priorities beyond 2015: an international survey and prioritization exercise.

PubMed

Souza, Joao Paulo; Widmer, Mariana; Gülmezoglu, Ahmet Metin; Lawrie, Theresa Anne; Adejuyigbe, Ebunoluwa Aderonke; Carroli, Guillermo; Crowther, Caroline; Currie, Sheena M; Dowswell, Therese; Hofmeyr, Justus; Lavender, Tina; Lawn, Joy; Mader, Silke; Martinez, Francisco Eulógio; Mugerwa, Kidza; Qureshi, Zahida; Silvestre, Maria Asuncion; Soltani, Hora; Torloni, Maria Regina; Tsigas, Eleni Z; Vowles, Zoe; Ouedraogo, Léopold; Serruya, Suzanne; Al-Raiby, Jamela; Awin, Narimah; Obara, Hiromi; Mathai, Matthews; Bahl, Rajiv; Martines, José; Ganatra, Bela; Phillips, Sharon Jelena; Johnson, Brooke Ronald; Vogel, Joshua P; Oladapo, Olufemi T; Temmerman, Marleen

2014-08-07

Maternal mortality has declined by nearly half since 1990, but over a quarter million women still die every year of causes related to pregnancy and childbirth. Maternal-health related targets are falling short of the 2015 Millennium Development Goals and a post-2015 Development Agenda is emerging. In connection with this, setting global research priorities for the next decade is now required. We adapted the methods of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) to identify and set global research priorities for maternal and perinatal health for the period 2015 to 2025. Priority research questions were received from various international stakeholders constituting a large reference group, and consolidated into a final list of research questions by a technical working group. Questions on this list were then scored by the reference working group according to five independent and equally weighted criteria. Normalized research priority scores (NRPS) were calculated, and research priority questions were ranked accordingly. A list of 190 priority research questions for improving maternal and perinatal health was scored by 140 stakeholders. Most priority research questions (89%) were concerned with the evaluation of implementation and delivery of existing interventions, with research subthemes frequently concerned with training and/or awareness interventions (11%), and access to interventions and/or services (14%). Twenty-one questions (11%) involved the discovery of new interventions or technologies. Key research priorities in maternal and perinatal health were identified. The resulting ranked list of research questions provides a valuable resource for health research investors, researchers and other stakeholders. We are hopeful that this exercise will inform the post-2015 Development Agenda and assist donors, research-policy decision makers and researchers to invest in research that will ultimately make the most significant difference in the lives of mothers and babies.

Determining and broadening the definition of impact from implementing a rational priority setting approach in a healthcare organization.

PubMed

Cornelissen, Evelyn; Mitton, Craig; Davidson, Alan; Reid, Colin; Hole, Rachelle; Visockas, Anne-Marie; Smith, Neale

2014-08-01

Techniques to manage scarce healthcare resources continue to evolve in response to changing, growing and competing demands. Yet there is no standard definition in the priority setting literature of what might constitute the desired impact or success of resource management activities. In this 2006-09 study, using action research methodology, we determined the impact of implementing a formal priority setting model, Program Budgeting and Marginal Analysis (PBMA), in a Canadian health authority. Qualitative data were collected through post year-1 (n = 12) and year-2 (n = 9) participant interviews, meeting observation and document review. Interviews were analyzed using a constant comparison technique to identify major themes. Impact can be defined as effects at three levels: system, group, and individual. System-level impact can be seen in the actual selection of priorities and resource re-allocation. In this case, participants prioritized a list of $760,000 worth of investment proposals and $38,000 of disinvestment proposals; however, there was no clear evidence as to whether financial resources were reallocated as a result. Group and individual impacts, less frequently reported in the literature, included changes in priority setting knowledge, attitudes and practice. PBMA impacts at these three levels were found to be interrelated. This work argues in favor of attempts to expand the definition of priority setting success by including both desired system-level outcomes like resource re-allocation and individual or group level impacts like changes to priority setting knowledge, attitudes and practice. These latter impacts are worth pursuing as they appear to be intrinsic to successful system-wide priority setting. A broader definition of PBMA impact may also suggest conceptualizing PBMA as both a priority setting approach and as a tool to develop individual and group priority setting knowledge and practice. These results should be of interest to researchers and decision makers using or considering a formal priority setting approach to manage scarce healthcare resources. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Educational affairs plan: A five-year strategy

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1987-01-01

A five-year plan is presented to guide the use of NASA resources in administering a focused and consistent set of aeronautics and space science education programs. Major initiatives outlined in this plan fall into two categories: programmatic priorities and institutional priorities. Programmatic priorities for this plan include elementary education, teacher education, underrepresented minority participation, educational technology and the Aerospace Education Services Project (AESP). Institutional priorities highlighted in this plan include university programs, educational publications and their distribution, educational partnerships with public and private organizations, educational research and evaluation, and activities of the educational affairs administration. The plan's aim is to directly and indirectly help to ensure an adequate pool of talented scientists, engineers and technical personnel to keep NASA at the forefront of advancements for the 21st century.

Setting healthcare priorities in hospitals: a review of empirical studies.

PubMed

Barasa, Edwine W; Molyneux, Sassy; English, Mike; Cleary, Susan

2015-04-01

Priority setting research has focused on the macro (national) and micro (bedside) level, leaving the meso (institutional, hospital) level relatively neglected. This is surprising given the key role that hospitals play in the delivery of healthcare services and the large proportion of health systems resources that they absorb. To explore the factors that impact upon priority setting at the hospital level, we conducted a thematic review of empirical studies. A systematic search of PubMed, EBSCOHOST, Econlit databases and Google scholar was supplemented by a search of key websites and a manual search of relevant papers' reference lists. A total of 24 papers were identified from developed and developing countries. We applied a policy analysis framework to examine and synthesize the findings of the selected papers. Findings suggest that priority setting practice in hospitals was influenced by (1) contextual factors such as decision space, resource availability, financing arrangements, availability and use of information, organizational culture and leadership, (2) priority setting processes that depend on the type of priority setting activity, (3) content factors such as priority setting criteria and (4) actors, their interests and power relations. We observe that there is need for studies to examine these issues and the interplay between them in greater depth and propose a conceptual framework that might be useful in examining priority setting practices in hospitals. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine © The Author 2014; all rights reserved.

Promoting community participation in priority setting in district health systems: experiences from Mbarali district, Tanzania

PubMed Central

Kamuzora, Peter; Maluka, Stephen; Ndawi, Benedict; Byskov, Jens; Hurtig, Anna-Karin

2013-01-01

Background Community participation in priority setting in health systems has gained importance all over the world, particularly in resource-poor settings where governments have often failed to provide adequate public-sector services for their citizens. Incorporation of public views into priority setting is perceived as a means to restore trust, improve accountability, and secure cost-effective priorities within healthcare. However, few studies have reported empirical experiences of involving communities in priority setting in developing countries. The aim of this article is to provide the experience of implementing community participation and the challenges of promoting it in the context of resource-poor settings, weak organizations, and fragile democratic institutions. Design Key informant interviews were conducted with the Council Health Management Team (CHMT), community representatives, namely women, youth, elderly, disabled, and people living with HIV/AIDS, and other stakeholders who participated in the preparation of the district annual budget and health plans. Additionally, minutes from the Action Research Team and planning and priority-setting meeting reports were analyzed. Results A number of benefits were reported: better identification of community needs and priorities, increased knowledge of the community representatives about priority setting, increased transparency and accountability, promoted trust among health systems and communities, and perceived improved quality and accessibility of health services. However, lack of funds to support the work of the selected community representatives, limited time for deliberations, short notice for the meetings, and lack of feedback on the approved priorities constrained the performance of the community representatives. Furthermore, the findings show the importance of external facilitation and support in enabling health professionals and community representatives to arrive at effective working arrangement. Conclusion Community participation in priority setting in developing countries, characterized by weak democratic institutions and low public awareness, requires effective mobilization of both communities and health systems. In addition, this study confirms that community participation is an important element in strengthening health systems. PMID:24280341

Changing Habits of Practice

PubMed Central

Bowen, Judith L; Salerno, Stephen M; Chamberlain, John K; Eckstrom, Elizabeth; Chen, Helen L; Brandenburg, Suzanne

2005-01-01

Purpose The majority of health care, both for acute and chronic conditions, is delivered in the ambulatory setting. Despite repeated proposals for change, the majority of internal medicine residency training still occurs in the inpatient setting. Substantial changes in ambulatory education are needed to correct the current imbalance. To assist educators and policy makers in this process, this paper reviews the literature on ambulatory education and makes recommendations for change. Methods The authors searched the Medline, Psychlit, and ERIC databases from 2000 to 2004 for studies that focused specifically on curriculum, teaching, and evaluation of internal medicine residents in the ambulatory setting to update previous reviews. Studies had to contain primary data and were reviewed for methodological rigor and relevance. Results Fifty-five studies met criteria for review. Thirty-five of the studies focused on specific curricular areas and 11 on ambulatory teaching methods. Five involved evaluating performance and 4 focused on structural issues. No study evaluated the overall effectiveness of ambulatory training or investigated the effects of current resident continuity clinic microsystems on education. Conclusion This updated review continues to identify key deficiencies in ambulatory training curriculum and faculty skills. The authors make several recommendations: (1) Make training in the ambulatory setting a priority. (2) Address systems problems in practice environments. (3) Create learning experiences appropriate to the resident's level of development. (4) Teach and evaluate in the examination room. (5) Expand subspecialty-based training to the ambulatory setting. (6) Make faculty development a priority. (7) Create and fund multiinstitutional educational research consortia. PMID:16423112

Short-term predictive capacity of two different triage systems in patients with acute heart failure: TRICA-EAHFE study.

PubMed

Miró, Òscar; Tost, Josep; Herrero, Pablo; Jacob, Javier; Martín-Sánchez, Francisco Javier; Gil, Víctor; Fernández-Pérez, Cristina; Escoda, Rosa; Llorens, Pere

2016-12-01

To evaluate whether prioritization of patients with acute heart failure (AHF) in the Andorran Triage Model/Spanish Triage System (MAT/SET) and the Manchester Triage System (MTS) also allows the identification of different profiles of outcome and prognosis and determine whether either system has a better predictive capacity of outcomes. Patients with AHF included in the Spanish EAHFE registry from hospitals using the MAT/SET or MTS were selected and divided according to the triage system used. Outcome variables included hospital admission, length of stay, death during admission, 3, 7, and 30-day all-cause mortality, and emergency department (ED) reconsultation at 30 days. The results were compared according to the level of priority and the triage system used. We included 3837 patients (MAT/SET=2474; MTS=1363) classified as follows: 4.0% level 1; 34.7% level 2; 55.1% level 3; and 6.3% levels 4-5. Both systems associated greater priority with higher rates of admission and mortality; the MTS associated greater priority with greater ED reconsultation and the MAT/SET found greater priority to be associated with less ED reconsultation. The discriminative capacity of the two scales for adverse outcomes was statistically significant, albeit poor, for almost all the outcome events and it was of scarce clinical relevance (Area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic between 0.458 and 0.661). The prediction of the outcome of patients with AHF determined with the MAT/SET or MTS showed scarce differences between the two systems, and their discriminative capacity does not seem to be clinically relevant.

An assessment of implementation and evaluation phases of strategic plans in Iranian hospitals.

PubMed

Sadeghifar, Jamil; Tofighi, Shahram; Roshani, Mohamad; Toulideh, Zahra; Mohsenpour, Seyedramezan; Jafari, Mehdi

2017-01-01

To assess the implementation and evaluation phases of strategic plans in selected hospitals. We conducted a cross-sectional study of implementation and evaluation of strategic plan in 24 hospitals in 2015, using a questionnaire which consisted of two separate sections for strategic implementation and strategic evaluation. Data were analyzed with SPSS version 18. Nearly one-third of hospitals claimed that they allocate their budget based on priorities and strategic goals. However, it turned out that although goals had been set, no formal announcements had been made. Most of the hospitals stated that they used measures when evaluating the plan. For hospital staff, clarifying the hospital's priorities was the most important advantage of a strategic plan. There is no clear definition for strategic management in Iranian hospitals, which results in chaotic implementation and control of strategic planning.

Patients' views on priority setting in neurosurgery: A qualitative study.

PubMed

Gunaratnam, Caroline; Bernstein, Mark

2016-01-01

Accountability for Reasonableness is an ethical framework which has been implemented in various health care systems to improve and evaluate the fairness of priority setting. This framework is grounded on four mandatory conditions: relevance, publicity, appeals, and enforcement. There have been few studies which have evaluated the patient stakeholders' acceptance of this framework; certainly no studies have been done on patients' views on the prioritization system for allocating patients for operating time in a system with pressure on the resource of inpatient beds. The aim of this study is to examine neurosurgical patients' views on the prioritization of patients for operating theater (OT) time on a daily basis at a tertiary and quaternary referral neurosurgery center. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with thirty-seven patients, recruited from the neurosurgery clinic at Toronto Western Hospital. Family members and friends who accompanied the patient to their clinic visit were encouraged to contribute to the discussion. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and subjected to thematic analysis using open and axial coding. Overall, patients are supportive of the concept of a priority-setting system based on fairness, but felt that a few changes would help to improve the fairness of the current system. These changes include lowering the level of priority given to volume-funded cases and providing scheduled surgeries that were previously canceled a higher level of prioritization. Good communication, early notification, and rescheduling canceled surgeries as soon as possible were important factors that directly reflected the patients' confidence level in their doctor, the hospital, and the health care system. This study is the first clinical qualitative study of patients' perspective on a prioritization system used for allocating neurosurgical patients for OT time on a daily basis in a socialized not-for-profit health care system with fixed resources.

Ensuring relevance for Cochrane reviews: evaluating processes and methods for prioritizing topics for Cochrane reviews.

PubMed

Nasser, Mona; Welch, Vivian; Tugwell, Peter; Ueffing, Erin; Doyle, Jodie; Waters, Elizabeth

2013-05-01

The purpose of this study was to assess the presence and effectiveness of existing systems of prioritization for Cochrane review topics and to explore methods of improving those systems. We surveyed groups of Cochrane review authors and recorded any evidence of their use of priority-setting processes or policies. To evaluate the effectiveness of the policies we encountered, we assessed them using two frameworks from the literature: "Accountability for Reasonableness" (1) and Sibbald's 2009 framework (2) for successful priority setting. We then held two workshops with the subject groups to discuss our findings and their implications. Of the 66 groups surveyed, 29 had a system in place to inform the selection or prioritization of topics for Cochrane reviews. Fifteen groups used a more comprehensive structured approach that eventually resulted in a list of ranked priority titles for authoring, updating, or disseminating Cochrane reviews. Most groups involved researchers, practitioners, and patients in their prioritization processes. Groups within The Cochrane Collaboration currently use a range of different priority-setting systems, some of which are more detailed than others. These differences often reflect the nature of The Cochrane Collaboration itself: given the topic breadth, history, and variety of international contexts present in the organization, a single unified system would not always be appropriate. All Cochrane entities, however, should have or develop strategic plans to improve the inclusiveness and transparency of their own prioritization processes, increase the number of finished prioritized reviews, and make more effective use of feedback from end users to increase the likelihood of producing reviews that have positive effects on health outcomes. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Patients', clinicians' and the research communities' priorities for treatment research: there is an important mismatch.

PubMed

Crowe, Sally; Fenton, Mark; Hall, Matthew; Cowan, Katherine; Chalmers, Iain

2015-01-01

There is some evidence that there is a mismatch between what patients and health professionals want to see researched and the research that is actually done. The James Lind Alliance (JLA) research Priority Setting Partnerships (PSPs) were created to address this mismatch. Between 2007 and 2014, JLA partnerships of patients, carers and health professionals agreed on important treatment research questions (priorities) in a range of health conditions, such as Type 1 diabetes, eczema and stroke. We were interested in how much these JLA PSP priorities were similar to treatments undergoing evaluation and research over the same time span. We identified the treatments described in all the JLA PSP research priority lists and compared these to the treatments described in a group of research studies (randomly selected) registered publically. The priorities identified by JLA PSPs emphasised the importance of non-drug treatment research, compared to the research actually being done over the same time period, which mostly involved evaluations of drugs. These findings suggest that the research community should make greater efforts to address issues of importance to users of research, such as patients and healthcare professionals. Background Comparisons of treatment research priorities identified by patients and clinicians with research actually being done by researchers are very rare. One of the best known of these comparisons (Tallon et al. Relation between agendas of the research community and the research consumer 355:2037-40, 2000) revealed important mismatches in priorities in the assessment of treatments for osteoarthritis of the knee: researchers preferenced drug trials, patients and clinicians prioritised non-drug treatments. These findings were an important stimulus in creating the James Lind Alliance (JLA). The JLA supports research Priority Setting Partnerships (PSPs) of patients, carers and clinicians, who are actively involved in all aspects of the process, to develop shared treatment research priorities. We have compared the types of treatments (interventions) prioritised for evaluation by JLA PSPs with those being studied in samples of clinical trials being done over the same period. Objective We used treatment research priorities generated by JLA PSPs to assess whether, on average, treatments prioritised by patients and clinicians differ importantly from those being studied by researchers. Methods We identified treatments mentioned in prioritised research questions generated by the first 14 JLA PSPs. We compared these treatments with those assessed in random samples of commercial and non-commercial clinical trials recruiting in the UK over the same period, which we identified using WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Results We found marked differences between the proportions of different types of treatments proposed by patients, carers and clinicians and those currently being evaluated by researchers. In JLA PSPs, drugs accounted for only 18 % (23/126) of the treatments mentioned in priorities; in registered non-commercial trials, drugs accounted for 37 % (397/1069) of the treatments mentioned; and in registered commercial trials, drugs accounted for 86 % (689/798) of the treatments mentioned. Discussion Our findings confirm the mismatch first described by Tallon et al. 15 years ago. On average, drug trials are being preferenced by researchers, and non-drug treatments are preferred by patients, carers and clinicians. This general finding should be reflected in more specific assessments of the extent to which research is addressing priorities identified by the patient and clinician end users of research. It also suggests that the research culture is slow to change in regard to how important and relevant treatment research questions are identified and prioritised.

25 CFR 32.4 - Policies.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... control in planning, priority-setting, development, management, operation, staffing and evaluation in all... exemplary programs reflecting Tribal or Alaska Native village specific learning styles, including but not... management information system which will provide statistical information such as, but not limited to, student...

Strengthening fairness, transparency and accountability in health care priority setting at district level in Tanzania

PubMed Central

Maluka, Stephen Oswald

2011-01-01

Health care systems are faced with the challenge of resource scarcity and have insufficient resources to respond to all health problems and target groups simultaneously. Hence, priority setting is an inevitable aspect of every health system. However, priority setting is complex and difficult because the process is frequently influenced by political, institutional and managerial factors that are not considered by conventional priority-setting tools. In a five-year EU-supported project, which started in 2006, ways of strengthening fairness and accountability in priority setting in district health management were studied. This review is based on a PhD thesis that aimed to analyse health care organisation and management systems, and explore the potential and challenges of implementing Accountability for Reasonableness (A4R) approach to priority setting in Tanzania. A qualitative case study in Mbarali district formed the basis of exploring the sociopolitical and institutional contexts within which health care decision making takes place. The study also explores how the A4R intervention was shaped, enabled and constrained by the contexts. Key informant interviews were conducted. Relevant documents were also gathered and group priority-setting processes in the district were observed. The study revealed that, despite the obvious national rhetoric on decentralisation, actual practice in the district involved little community participation. The assumption that devolution to local government promotes transparency, accountability and community participation, is far from reality. The study also found that while the A4R approach was perceived to be helpful in strengthening transparency, accountability and stakeholder engagement, integrating the innovation into the district health system was challenging. This study underscores the idea that greater involvement and accountability among local actors may increase the legitimacy and fairness of priority-setting decisions. A broader and more detailed analysis of health system elements, and socio-cultural context is imperative in fostering sustainability. Additionally, the study stresses the need to deal with power asymmetries among various actors in priority-setting contexts. PMID:22072991

Priority setting and implementation in a centralized health system: a case study of Kerman province in Iran.

PubMed

Khayatzadeh-Mahani, Akram; Fotaki, Marianna; Harvey, Gillian

2013-08-01

The question of how priority setting processes work remains topical, contentious and political in every health system across the globe. It is particularly acute in the context of developing countries because of the mismatch between needs and resources, which is often compounded by an underdeveloped capacity for decision making and weak institutional infrastructures. Yet there is limited research into how the process of setting and implementing health priorities works in developing countries. This study aims to address this gap by examining how a national priority setting programme works in the centralized health system of Iran and what factors influence its implementation at the meso and micro levels. We used a qualitative case study approach, incorporating mixed methods: in-depth interviews at three levels and a textual analysis of policy documents. The data analysis showed that the process of priority setting is non-systematic, there is little transparency as to how specific priorities are decided, and the decisions made are separated from their implementation. This is due to the highly centralized system, whereby health priorities are set at the macro level without involving meso or micro local levels or any representative of the public. Furthermore, the two main benefit packages are decided by different bodies (Ministry of Health and Medical Education and Ministry of Welfare and Social Security) and there is no co-ordination between them. The process is also heavily influenced by political pressure exerted by various groups, mostly medical professionals who attempt to control priority setting in accordance with their interests. Finally, there are many weaknesses in the implementation of priorities, resulting in a growing gap between rural and urban areas in terms of access to health services.

Ethics and equity in research priority-setting: stakeholder engagement and the needs of disadvantaged groups.

PubMed

Bhaumik, Soumyadeep; Rana, Sangeeta; Karimkhani, Chante; Welch, Vivian; Armstrong, Rebecca; Pottie, Kevin; Dellavalle, Robert; Dhakal, Purushottam; Oliver, Sandy; Francis, Damian K; Nasser, Mona; Crowe, Sally; Aksut, Baran; Amico, Roberto D

2015-01-01

A transparent and evidence-based priority-setting process promotes the optimal use of resources to improve health outcomes. Decision-makers and funders have begun to increasingly engage representatives of patients and healthcare consumers to ensure that research becomes more relevant. However, disadvantaged groups and their needs may not be integrated into the priority-setting process since they do not have a "political voice" or are unable to organise into interest groups. Equitable priority-setting methods need to balance patient needs, values, experiences with population-level issues and issues related to the health system.

Setting global research priorities for developmental disabilities, including intellectual disabilities and autism.

PubMed

Tomlinson, M; Yasamy, M T; Emerson, E; Officer, A; Richler, D; Saxena, S

2014-12-01

The prevalence of intellectual disabilities (ID) has been estimated at 10.4/1000 worldwide with higher rates among children and adolescents in lower income countries. The objective of this paper is to address research priorities for development disabilities, notably ID and autism, at the global level and to propose the more rational use of scarce funds in addressing this under-investigated area. An expert group was identified and invited to systematically list and score research questions. They applied the priority setting methodology of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) to generate research questions and to evaluate them using a set of five criteria: answerability, feasibility, applicability and impact, support within the context and equity. The results of this process clearly indicated that the important priorities for future research related to the need for effective and efficient approaches to early intervention, empowerment of families supporting a person with developmental disability and to address preventable causes of poor health in people with ID and autism. For the public health and other systems to become more effective in delivering appropriate support to persons with developmental disabilities, greater (and more targeted) investment in research is required to produce evidence of what works consistent with international human rights standards. © 2014 MENCAP and International Association of the Scientific Study of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Priority setting for health technology assessments: a systematic review of current practical approaches.

PubMed

Noorani, Hussein Z; Husereau, Donald R; Boudreau, Rhonda; Skidmore, Becky

2007-01-01

This study sought to identify and compare various practical and current approaches of health technology assessment (HTA) priority setting. A literature search was performed across PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, and Cochrane. Given an earlier review conducted by European agencies (EUR-ASSESS project), the search was limited to literature indexed from 1996 onward. We also searched Web sites of HTA agencies as well as HTAi and ISTAHC conference abstracts. Agency representatives were contacted for information about their priority-setting processes. Reports on practical approaches selected through these sources were identified independently by two reviewers. A total of twelve current priority-setting frameworks from eleven agencies were identified. Ten countries were represented: Canada, Denmark, England, Hungary, Israel, Scotland, Spain, Sweden, The Netherlands, and United States. Fifty-nine unique HTA priority-setting criteria were divided into eleven categories (alternatives; budget impact; clinical impact; controversial nature of proposed technology; disease burden; economic impact; ethical, legal, or psychosocial implications; evidence; interest; timeliness of review; variation in rates of use). Differences across HTA agencies were found regarding procedures for categorizing, scoring, and weighing of policy criteria. Variability exists in the methods for priority setting of health technology assessment across HTA agencies. Quantitative rating methods and consideration of cost benefit for priority setting were seldom used. These study results will assist HTA agencies that are re-visiting or developing their prioritization methods.

76 FR 58398 - Revised Guidance on Marketed Unapproved Drugs; Compliance Policy Guide Sec. 440.100; Marketed New...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-09-21

... enforcement action at any time, without prior notice and without regard to the enforcement priorities set... the enforcement priorities set forth in CPG 440.100 for unapproved new drugs marketed prior to September 19, 2011. The revision to CPG 440.100 excludes from the enforcement priorities set forth in the...

Clinical Problem Solving Exercises for Pre-Clinical Medical Education: A Design, Implementation and Preliminary Evaluation.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bordage, Georges

Clinical problem solving exercises for preclinical medical education that were developed at Michigan State University School of Osteopathic Medicine are described. Two types of outcomes were set as priorities in the design and implementation of the problem solving sessions: small group peer interactions as instructional and evaluative resources;…

Use of economic evaluation in local health care decision-making in England: a qualitative investigation.

PubMed

Eddama, Oya; Coast, Joanna

2009-03-01

To explore decision-making and the use of economic evaluation at the local health care decision-making level in England (UK). Data collection was over a 16-month period (January 2003 to April 2004). Data collection comprised 29 in-depth interviews with a range of decision makers, 13 observations of decision-making meetings, and analysis of documents produced at meetings. A constant comparative approach was used to identify broad themes and sub-themes arising from the data. Data were analysed using Microsoft Word. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance provides the main way in which economic evaluation is used at a local level in the UK, although following NICE guidance is often regarded as detrimental to pursuing local priorities. Other than through NICE, economic evaluation is not considered at the local level; we found no evidence for use at the meeting group (by individuals). Although decision makers appear to understand notions of scarcity, with some also referring to value for money, the process of decision-making departs from these principles in practice. Disinvestment decisions are not made nor are decisions weighted against pre-defined criteria. Options appraisal is conducted, but it does not embody the principles of economic evaluation, since options are not considered in terms of their costs and benefits and opportunity cost is not accounted for. There appear to be two reasons why economic evaluation is not used at the local level: (1) the nature of management decisions concerned with the employment of extra staff and new equipment, rather than the choice of medicines or specific interventions usually assessed in published economic evaluation; (2) lack of awareness of the economic evaluation approach to decision-making. These two factors point to a lack of freedom in decision-making at the local level and a lack of understanding of how priority setting can be achieved in practice. A more detailed and rigorous approach to prioritisation at the local level is required. Whilst, PCTs have been given greater responsibility for priority setting, they lack the necessary power and understanding of the ways in which long term solutions to problems in health care can be achieved. Economics can be a valuable asset to priority setting and has already filtered into the jargon used by decision makers. Whilst most concepts are understood, the leap to adopting these concepts into the practice of decision-making needs to be made.

[Priority pollutants ranking and screening of coke industry based on USEtox model].

PubMed

Hao, Tian; Du, Peng-Fei; Du, Bin; Zeng, Si-Yu

2014-01-01

Thesis aims at evaluating and setting priority to human toxicity and ecotoxicity of coking pollutants. A field research and sampling project are conducted in coke plant in Shanxi so as to complete the coke emission inventory. The USEtox model representing recommended practice in LCIA characterization is applied to the emission inventory to quantify the potential impacts on human toxicity and ecotoxicity of emerging pollutants. Priority pollutants, production procedures and effects of changing plant site on the toxicity are analyzed. As conclusions, benzo(a) pyrene, benzene, Zn and As are identified as the priority pollutants in human toxicity, while pyrene and anthracene in ecotoxicity. Coal charging is the dominant procedure for organic toxicity and priority pollutants include benzo (a) pyrene, benzene, naphthalene, etc. While coke drenching is the dominant procedure for metal toxicity and priority pollutants include Zn, As, Ti, Hg etc. Emission to rural environment can reduce the organic toxicity significantly compared to the emission to urban environment. However, the site changing has no effect on metal toxicity and might increase the risk of the metal pollution to rural water and soil.

An assessment of implementation and evaluation phases of strategic plans in Iranian hospitals

PubMed Central

Sadeghifar, Jamil; Tofighi, Shahram; Roshani, Mohamad; Toulideh, Zahra; Mohsenpour, Seyedramezan; Jafari, Mehdi

2017-01-01

Objectives: To assess the implementation and evaluation phases of strategic plans in selected hospitals. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of implementation and evaluation of strategic plan in 24 hospitals in 2015, using a questionnaire which consisted of two separate sections for strategic implementation and strategic evaluation. Data were analyzed with SPSS version 18. Results: Nearly one-third of hospitals claimed that they allocate their budget based on priorities and strategic goals. However, it turned out that although goals had been set, no formal announcements had been made. Most of the hospitals stated that they used measures when evaluating the plan. For hospital staff, clarifying the hospital’s priorities was the most important advantage of a strategic plan. Conclusion: There is no clear definition for strategic management in Iranian hospitals, which results in chaotic implementation and control of strategic planning. PMID:29085637

Priority setting in healthcare: towards guidelines for the program budgeting and marginal analysis framework.

PubMed

Peacock, Stuart J; Mitton, Craig; Ruta, Danny; Donaldson, Cam; Bate, Angela; Hedden, Lindsay

2010-10-01

Economists' approaches to priority setting focus on the principles of opportunity cost, marginal analysis and choice under scarcity. These approaches are based on the premise that it is possible to design a rational priority setting system that will produce legitimate changes in resource allocation. However, beyond issuing guidance at the national level, economic approaches to priority setting have had only a moderate impact in practice. In particular, local health service organizations - such as health authorities, health maintenance organizations, hospitals and healthcare trusts - have had difficulty implementing evidence from economic appraisals. Yet, in the context of making decisions between competing claims on scarce health service resources, economic tools and thinking have much to offer. The purpose of this article is to describe and discuss ten evidence-based guidelines for the successful design and implementation of a program budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA) priority setting exercise. PBMA is a framework that explicitly recognizes the need to balance pragmatic and ethical considerations with economic rationality when making resource allocation decisions. While the ten guidelines are drawn from the PBMA framework, they may be generalized across a range of economic approaches to priority setting.

Multi-criteria decision analysis of breast cancer control in low- and middle- income countries: development of a rating tool for policy makers.

PubMed

Venhorst, Kristie; Zelle, Sten G; Tromp, Noor; Lauer, Jeremy A

2014-01-01

The objective of this study was to develop a rating tool for policy makers to prioritize breast cancer interventions in low- and middle- income countries (LMICs), based on a simple multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) approach. The definition and identification of criteria play a key role in MCDA, and our rating tool could be used as part of a broader priority setting exercise in a local setting. This tool may contribute to a more transparent priority-setting process and fairer decision-making in future breast cancer policy development. First, an expert panel (n = 5) discussed key considerations for tool development. A literature review followed to inventory all relevant criteria and construct an initial set of criteria. A Delphi study was then performed and questionnaires used to discuss a final list of criteria with clear definitions and potential scoring scales. For this Delphi study, multiple breast cancer policy and priority-setting experts from different LMICs were selected and invited by the World Health Organization. Fifteen international experts participated in all three Delphi rounds to assess and evaluate each criterion. This study resulted in a preliminary rating tool for assessing breast cancer interventions in LMICs. The tool consists of 10 carefully crafted criteria (effectiveness, quality of the evidence, magnitude of individual health impact, acceptability, cost-effectiveness, technical complexity, affordability, safety, geographical coverage, and accessibility), with clear definitions and potential scoring scales. This study describes the development of a rating tool to assess breast cancer interventions in LMICs. Our tool can offer supporting knowledge for the use or development of rating tools as part of a broader (MCDA based) priority setting exercise in local settings. Further steps for improving the tool are proposed and should lead to its useful adoption in LMICs.

75 FR 74053 - Availability of Final Toxicological Profiles

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-11-30

... priority hazardous substances comprising the twenty-first set prepared by ATSDR. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION... final toxicological profiles of priority hazardous substances comprising the twenty-first set prepared... that are most commonly found at facilities on the CERCLA National Priorities List (NPL). Among these...

Setting priorities in primary health care--on whose conditions? A questionnaire study.

PubMed

Arvidsson, Eva; André, Malin; Borgquist, Lars; Andersson, David; Carlsson, Per

2012-11-26

In Sweden three key criteria are used for priority setting: severity of the health condition; patient benefit; and cost-effectiveness. They are derived from the ethical principles established by the Swedish parliament 1997 but have been used only to a limited extent in primary care. The aim of this study was to describe and analyse: 1) GPs', nurses', and patients' prioritising in routine primary care 2) The association between the three key priority setting criteria and the overall priority assigned by the GPs and nurses to individual patients. Paired questionnaires were distributed to all patients and the GPs or nurses they had contact with during a 2-week period at four health centres in Sweden. The staff registered the health conditions or health problem, and the planned intervention. Then they estimated the severity of the health condition, the expected patient benefit, and the cost-effectiveness of the planned intervention. Both the staff and the patients reported their overall prioritisation of the patient. In total, 1851 paired questionnaires were collected. Compared to the medical staff, the patients assigned relatively higher priority to acute/minor conditions than to preventive check-ups for chronic conditions. Severity of the health condition was the priority setting criterion that had the strongest association with the overall priority for the staff as a whole, but for the GPs it was cost-effectiveness. The challenge for primary care providers is to balance the patients' demands with medical needs and cost-effectiveness. Transparent priority setting in primary care might contribute to a greater consensus between GPs and nurses on how to use the key priority setting criteria.

Setting research priorities across science, technology, and health sectors: the Tanzania experience.

PubMed

de Haan, Sylvia; Kingamkono, Rose; Tindamanyire, Neema; Mshinda, Hassan; Makandi, Harun; Tibazarwa, Flora; Kubata, Bruno; Montorzi, Gabriela

2015-03-12

Identifying research priorities is key to innovation and economic growth, since it informs decision makers on effectively targeting issues that have the greatest potential public benefit. As such, the process of setting research priorities is of pivotal importance for favouring the science, technology, and innovation (STI)-driven development of low- and middle-income countries. We report herein on a major cross-sectoral nationwide research priority setting effort recently carried out in Tanzania by the Tanzania Commission for Science and Technology (COSTECH) in partnership with the Council on Health Research for Development (COHRED) and the NEPAD Agency. The first of its type in the country, the process brought together stakeholders from 42 sub-sectors in science, technology, and health. The cross-sectoral research priority setting process consisted of a 'training-of-trainers' workshop, a demonstration workshop, and seven priority setting workshops delivered to representatives from public and private research and development institutions, universities, non-governmental organizations, and other agencies affiliated to COSTECH. The workshops resulted in ranked listings of research priorities for each sub-sector, totalling approximately 800 priorities. This large number was significantly reduced by an expert panel in order to build a manageable instrument aligned to national development plans that could be used to guide research investments. The Tanzania experience is an instructive example of the challenges and issues to be faced in when attempting to identify research priority areas and setting an STI research agenda in low- and middle-income countries. As countries increase their investment in research, it is essential to increase investment in research management and governance as well, a key and much needed capacity for countries to make proper use of research investments.

Priority setting in practice: participants opinions on vertical and horizontal priority setting for reallocation.

PubMed

Waldau, Susanne; Lindholm, Lars; Wiechel, Anna Helena

2010-08-01

In the Västerbotten County Council in Sweden a priority setting process was undertaken to reallocate existing resources for funding of new methods and activities. Resources were created by limiting low priority services. A procedure for priority setting was constructed and fully tested by engaging the entire organisation. The procedure included priority setting within and between departments and political decision making. Participants' views and experiences were collected as a basis for future improvement of the process. Results indicate that participants appreciated the overall approach and methodology and wished to engage in their improvement. Among the improvement proposals is prolongation of the process in order to improve the knowledge base quality. The procedure for identification of new items for funding also needs to be revised. The priority setting process was considered an overall success because it fulfilled its political goals. Factors considered crucial for success are a wish among managers for an economic strategy that addresses existing internal resource allocation; process management characterized by goal orientation and clear leadership; an elaborate communications strategy integrated early in the process and its management; political unity in support of the procedure, and a strong political commitment throughout the process. Generalizability has already been demonstrated by several health care organisations that performed processes founded on this working model. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Analysis of Decision Making Skills for Large Scale Disaster Response

DTIC Science & Technology

2015-08-21

Capability to influence and collaborate Compassion Teamwork Communication Leadership Provide vision of outcome / set priorities Confidence, courage to make...project evaluates the viability of expanding the use of serious games to augment classroom training, tabletop and full scale exercise, and actual...training, evaluation, analysis, and technology ex- ploration. Those techniques have found successful niches, but their wider applicability faces

Proceduralism and its role in economic evaluation and priority setting in health.

PubMed

Jan, Stephen

2014-05-01

This paper provides a critical overview of Gavin Mooney's proceduralist approach to economic evaluation and priority setting in health. Proceduralism is the notion that the social value attached to alternative courses of action should be determined not only by outcomes, but also processes. Mooney's brand of proceduralism was unique and couched within a broader critique of 'neo-liberal' economics. It operated on a number of levels. At the micro level of the individual program, he pioneered the notion that 'process utility' could be valued and measured within economic evaluation. At a macro level, he developed a framework in which the social objective of equity was defined by procedural justice in which communitarian values were used as the basis for judging how resources should be allocated across the health system. Finally, he applied the notion of procedural justice to further our understanding of the political economy of resource allocation; highlighting how fairness in decision making processes can overcome the sometimes intractable zero-sum resource allocation problem. In summary, his contributions to this field have set the stage for innovative programs of research to help in developing health policies and programs that are both in alignment with community values and implementable. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

APPETITE CONTROL: METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF THE EVALUATION OF FOODS

PubMed Central

Blundell, John; de Graaf, Cees; Hulshof, Toine; Jebb, Susan; Livingstone, Barbara; Lluch, Anne; Mela, David; Salah, Samir; Schuring, Ewoud; van der Knaap, Henk; Westerterp, Margriet

2013-01-01

This report describes a set of scientific procedures used to assess the impact of foods and food ingredients on the expression of appetite (psychological and behavioural). An overarching priority has been to enable potential evaluators of health claims about foods to identify justified claims, and to exclude claims that are not supported by scientific evidence for the effect cited. This priority follows precisely from the principles set down in the PASSCLAIM report. (4) The report allows the evaluation of the strength of health claims, about the effects of foods on appetite, which can be sustained on the basis of the commonly used scientific designs and experimental procedures. The report includes different designs for assessing effects on satiation as opposed to satiety,detailed coverage of the extent to which a change in hunger can stand-alone as a measure of appetite control, and an extensive discussion of the statistical procedures appropriate for handling data in this field of research. Since research in this area is continually evolving, new improved methodologies may emerge over time and will need to be incorporated into the framework. One main objective of the report has been to produce guidance on good practice in carrying out appetite research, and not to set down a series of commandments that must be followed. PMID:20122136

Comparison of national health research priority-setting methods and characteristics in Latin America and the Caribbean, 2002-2012.

PubMed

Reveiz, Ludovic; Elias, Vanessa; Terry, Robert F; Alger, Jackeline; Becerra-Posada, Francisco

2013-07-01

To compare health research priority-setting methods and characteristics among countries in Latin America and the Caribbean during 2002 - 2012. This was a systematic review that identified national health research policies and priority agendas through a search of ministry and government databases related to health care institutions. PubMed, LILACS, the Health Research Web, and others were searched for the period from January 2002 - February 2012. The study excluded research organized by governmental institutions and specific national strategies on particular disease areas. Priority-setting methods were compared to the "nine common themes for good practice in health research priorities." National health research priorities were compared to those of the World Health Organization's Millennium Development Goals (MDG). Of the 18 Latin American countries assessed, 13 had documents that established national health research priorities; plus the Caribbean Health Research Council had a research agenda for its 19 constituents. These 14 total reports varied widely in terms of objectives, content, dissemination, and implementation; most provided a list of strategic areas, suggestions, and/or sub-priorities for each country; however, few proposed specific research topics and questions. Future reports could be improved by including more details on the comprehensive approach employed to identify priorities, on the information gathering process, and on practices to be undertaken after priorities are set. There is a need for improving the quality of the methodologies utilized and coordinating Regional efforts as countries strive to meet the MDG.

DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM EVALUATIONS OF THE CONTAMINANT CANDIDATE LIST

EPA Science Inventory

The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), as amended in 1996, requires EPA to establish a list of unregulated microbiological and chemical contaminants to aid in priority setting for the Agency's drinking water program. The list is referred to as the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL). A...

Setting the top 10 research priorities to improve the health of people with Type 2 diabetes: a Diabetes UK-James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.

PubMed

Finer, S; Robb, P; Cowan, K; Daly, A; Shah, K; Farmer, A

2018-07-01

To describe processes and outcomes of a priority setting partnership to identify the 'top 10 research priorities' in Type 2 diabetes, involving people living with the condition, their carers, and healthcare professionals. We followed the four-step James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership process which involved: gathering uncertainties using a questionnaire survey distributed to 70 000 people living with Type 2 diabetes and their carers, and healthcare professionals; organizing the uncertainties; interim priority setting by resampling of participants with a second survey; and final priority setting in an independent group of participants, using the nominal group technique. At each step the steering group closely monitored and guided the process. In the first survey, 8227 uncertainties were proposed by 2587 participants, of whom 18% were from black, Asian and minority ethnic groups. Uncertainties were formatted and collated into 114 indicative questions. A total of 1506 people contributed to a second survey, generating a shortlist of 24 questions equally weighted to the contributions of people living with diabetes and their carers and those of healthcare professionals. In the final step the 'top 10 research priorities' were selected, including questions on cure and reversal, risk identification and prevention, and self-management approaches in Type 2 diabetes. Systematic and transparent methodology was used to identify research priorities in a large and genuine partnership of people with lived and professional experience of Type 2 diabetes. The top 10 questions represent consensus areas of research priority to guide future research, deliver responsive and strategic allocation of research resources, and improve the future health and well-being of people living with, and at risk of, Type 2 diabetes. © 2018 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Diabetes UK.

Setting priorities for zinc-related health research to reduce children's disease burden worldwide: an application of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative's research priority-setting method.

PubMed

Brown, Kenneth H; Hess, Sonja Y; Boy, Erick; Gibson, Rosalind S; Horton, Susan; Osendarp, Saskia J; Sempertegui, Fernando; Shrimpton, Roger; Rudan, Igor

2009-03-01

To make the best use of limited resources for supporting health-related research to reduce child mortality, it is necessary to apply a suitable method to rank competing research options. The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) developed a new methodology for setting health research priorities. To broaden experience with this priority-setting technique, we applied the method to rank possible research priorities concerning the control of Zn deficiency. Although Zn deficiency is not generally recognized as a direct cause of child mortality, recent research indicates that it predisposes children to an increased incidence and severity of several of the major direct causes of morbidity and mortality. Leading experts in the field of Zn research in child health were identified and invited to participate in a technical working group (TWG) to establish research priorities. The individuals were chosen to represent a wide range of expertise in Zn nutrition. The seven TWG members submitted a total of ninety research options, which were then consolidated into a final list of thirty-one research options categorized by the type of resulting intervention. The identified priorities were dominated by research investment options targeting Zn supplementation, and were followed by research on Zn fortification, general aspects of Zn nutrition, dietary modification and other new interventions. In general, research options that aim to improve the efficiency of an already existing intervention strategy received higher priority scores. Challenges identified during the implementation of the methodology and suggestions to modify the priority-setting procedures are discussed.

How do external donors influence national health policy processes? Experiences of domestic policy actors in Cambodia and Pakistan.

PubMed

Khan, Mishal S; Meghani, Ankita; Liverani, Marco; Roychowdhury, Imara; Parkhurst, Justin

2018-03-01

Although concerns have historically been raised about the influence of external donors on health policy process in recipient countries, remarkably few studies have investigated perspectives and experiences of domestic policymakers and advisers. This study examines donor influence at different stages of the health policy process (priority setting, policy formulation, policy implementation and monitoring and evaluation) in two aid-dependent LMICs, Cambodia and Pakistan. It identifies mechanisms through which asymmetries in influence between donors and domestic policy actors emerge. We conducted 24 key informant interviews-14 in Pakistan and 10 in Cambodia-with high-level decision-makers who inform or authorize health priority setting, allocate resources and/or are responsible for policy implementation, identifying three routes of influence: financial resources, technical expertise and indirect financial and political incentives. We used both inductive and deductive approaches to analyse the data. Our findings indicate that different routes of influence emerged depending on the stage of the policy process. Control of financial resources was the most commonly identified route by which donors influenced priority setting and policy implementation. Greater (perceived) technical expertise played an important role in donor influence at the policy formulation stage. Donors' power in influencing decisions, particularly during the final (monitoring and evaluation) stage of the policy process, was mediated by their ability to control indirect financial and political incentives as well as direct control of financial resources. This study thus helps unpack the nuances of donor influence over health policymaking in these settings, and can potentially indicate areas that require attention to increase the ownership of domestic actors of their countries' health policy processes. © The Author(s) 2017. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

How do external donors influence national health policy processes? Experiences of domestic policy actors in Cambodia and Pakistan

PubMed Central

Khan, Mishal S; Liverani, Marco; Roychowdhury, Imara; Parkhurst, Justin

2018-01-01

Abstract Although concerns have historically been raised about the influence of external donors on health policy process in recipient countries, remarkably few studies have investigated perspectives and experiences of domestic policymakers and advisers. This study examines donor influence at different stages of the health policy process (priority setting, policy formulation, policy implementation and monitoring and evaluation) in two aid-dependent LMICs, Cambodia and Pakistan. It identifies mechanisms through which asymmetries in influence between donors and domestic policy actors emerge. We conducted 24 key informant interviews—14 in Pakistan and 10 in Cambodia—with high-level decision-makers who inform or authorize health priority setting, allocate resources and/or are responsible for policy implementation, identifying three routes of influence: financial resources, technical expertise and indirect financial and political incentives. We used both inductive and deductive approaches to analyse the data. Our findings indicate that different routes of influence emerged depending on the stage of the policy process. Control of financial resources was the most commonly identified route by which donors influenced priority setting and policy implementation. Greater (perceived) technical expertise played an important role in donor influence at the policy formulation stage. Donors’ power in influencing decisions, particularly during the final (monitoring and evaluation) stage of the policy process, was mediated by their ability to control indirect financial and political incentives as well as direct control of financial resources. This study thus helps unpack the nuances of donor influence over health policymaking in these settings, and can potentially indicate areas that require attention to increase the ownership of domestic actors of their countries’ health policy processes. PMID:29237026

Implementing accountability for reasonableness framework at district level in Tanzania: a realist evaluation.

PubMed

Maluka, Stephen; Kamuzora, Peter; Sansebastián, Miguel; Byskov, Jens; Ndawi, Benedict; Olsen, Øystein E; Hurtig, Anna-Karin

2011-02-10

Despite the growing importance of the Accountability for Reasonableness (A4R) framework in priority setting worldwide, there is still an inadequate understanding of the processes and mechanisms underlying its influence on legitimacy and fairness, as conceived and reflected in service management processes and outcomes. As a result, the ability to draw scientifically sound lessons for the application of the framework to services and interventions is limited. This paper evaluates the experiences of implementing the A4R approach in Mbarali District, Tanzania, in order to find out how the innovation was shaped, enabled, and constrained by the interaction between contexts, mechanisms and outcomes. This study draws on the principles of realist evaluation -- a largely qualitative approach, chiefly concerned with testing and refining programme theories by exploring the complex interactions of contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes. Mixed methods were used in data collection, including individual interviews, non-participant observation, and document reviews. A thematic framework approach was adopted for the data analysis. The study found that while the A4R approach to priority setting was helpful in strengthening transparency, accountability, stakeholder engagement, and fairness, the efforts at integrating it into the current district health system were challenging. Participatory structures under the decentralisation framework, central government's call for partnership in district-level planning and priority setting, perceived needs of stakeholders, as well as active engagement between researchers and decision makers all facilitated the adoption and implementation of the innovation. In contrast, however, limited local autonomy, low level of public awareness, unreliable and untimely funding, inadequate accountability mechanisms, and limited local resources were the major contextual factors that hampered the full implementation. This study documents an important first step in the effort to introduce the ethical framework A4R into district planning processes. This study supports the idea that a greater involvement and accountability among local actors through the A4R process may increase the legitimacy and fairness of priority-setting decisions. Support from researchers in providing a broader and more detailed analysis of health system elements, and the socio-cultural context, could lead to better prediction of the effects of the innovation and pinpoint stakeholders' concerns, thereby illuminating areas that require special attention to promote sustainability.

Past, present and future challenges in health care priority setting.

PubMed

Hall, William; Williams, Iestyn; Smith, Neale; Gold, Marthe; Coast, Joanna; Kapiriri, Lydia; Danis, M; Mitton, Craig

2018-05-21

Purpose Current conditions have intensified the need for health systems to engage in the difficult task of priority setting. As the search for a "magic bullet" is replaced by an appreciation for the interplay between evidence, interests, culture, and outcomes, progress in relation to these dimensions requires assessment of achievements to date and identification of areas where knowledge and practice require attention most urgently. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach An international survey was administered to experts in the area of priority setting. The survey consisted of open-ended questions focusing on notable achievements, policy and practice challenges, and areas for future research in the discipline of priority setting. It was administered online between February and March of 2015. Findings "Decision-making frameworks" and "Engagement" were the two most frequently mentioned notable achievements. "Priority setting in practice" and "Awareness and education" were the two most frequently mentioned policy and practical challenges. "Priority setting in practice" and "Engagement" were the two most frequently mentioned areas in need of future research. Research limitations/implications Sampling bias toward more developed countries. Future study could use findings to create a more concise version to distribute more broadly. Practical implications Globally, these findings could be used as a platform for discussion and decision making related to policy, practice, and research in this area. Originality/value Whilst this study reaffirmed the continued importance of many longstanding themes in the priority setting literature, it is possible to also discern clear shifts in emphasis as the discipline progresses in response to new challenges.

40 CFR 35.2015 - State priority system and project priority list.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... achieve optimum water quality management consistent with the goals and requirements of the Act. All..., needs and priorities set forth in areawide water quality management plans, and any other factors... priority to projects in priority water quality areas. The priority system may also include the...

15 CFR 2301.4 - Types of projects and broadcast priorities.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... Broadcast Priorities are set forth in order of priority for funding. (1) Priority 1—Provision of Public... priorities. 2301.4 Section 2301.4 Commerce and Foreign Trade Regulations Relating to Telecommunications and... TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES PROGRAM Application Requirements § 2301.4 Types of projects and broadcast priorities...

Communicating Ecological Indicators to Decision Makers and the Public

Treesearch

A. Schiller; Carolyn Hunsaker; M.A. Kane; A.K. Wolfe; V.H. Dale; G.W. Suter; C.S. Russell; G. Pion; N.H. Jensen; V.C. Konar

2001-01-01

Ecological assessments and monitoring programs often rely on indicators to evaluate environmental conditions. Such indicators are frequently developed by scientists, expressed in technical language, and target aspects of the environment that scientists consider useful. Yet setting environmental policy priorities and making environmental decisions requires both...

A Mathematical Analysis of Air Traffic Priority Rules

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Nakawicz, Anthony J.; Munoz, Cesar A.; Maddalon, Jeffrey M.

2012-01-01

This paper analyzes priority rules, such as those in Part 91.113 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. Such rules determine which of two aircraft should maneuver in a given conflict scenario. While the rules in 91.113 are well accepted, other concepts of operation for NextGen, such as self separation, may allow for different priority rules. A mathematical framework is presented that can be used to analyze a general set of priority rules and enables proofs of important properties. Specific properties considered in this paper include safety, effectiveness, and stability. A set of rules is said to be safe if it ensures that it is never the case that both aircraft have priority. They are effective if exactly one aircraft has priority in every situation. Finally, a set of rules is called stable if it produces compatible results even under small changes to input data.

15 CFR 700.11 - Priority ratings.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... DO-A1 or DX-A1 priority rating. A contract for a radar set will contain a DO-A7 or DX-A7 priority... 15 Commerce and Foreign Trade 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Priority ratings. 700.11 Section 700... DEFENSE PRIORITIES AND ALLOCATIONS SYSTEM Industrial Priorities § 700.11 Priority ratings. (a) Levels of...

The Diabetes Evaluation Framework for Innovative National Evaluations (DEFINE): Construct and Content Validation Using a Modified Delphi Method.

PubMed

Paquette-Warren, Jann; Tyler, Marie; Fournie, Meghan; Harris, Stewart B

2017-06-01

In order to scale-up successful innovations, more evidence is needed to evaluate programs that attempt to address the rising prevalence of diabetes and the associated burdens on patients and the healthcare system. This study aimed to assess the construct and content validity of the Diabetes Evaluation Framework for Innovative National Evaluations (DEFINE), a tool developed to guide the evaluation, design and implementation with built-in knowledge translation principles. A modified Delphi method, including 3 individual rounds (questionnaire with 7-point agreement/importance Likert scales and/or open-ended questions) and 1 group round (open discussion) were conducted. Twelve experts in diabetes, research, knowledge translation, evaluation and policy from Canada (Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia) and Australia participated. Quantitative consensus criteria were an interquartile range of ≤1. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically and confirmed by participants. An importance scale was used to determine a priority multi-level indicator set. Items rated very or extremely important by 80% or more of the experts were reviewed in the final group round to build the final set. Participants reached consensus on the content and construct validity of DEFINE, including its title, overall goal, 5-step evaluation approach, medical and nonmedical determinants of health schematics, full list of indicators and associated measurement tools, priority multi-level indicator set and next steps in DEFINE's development. Validated by experts, DEFINE has the right theoretic components to evaluate comprehensively diabetes prevention and management programs and to support acquisition of evidence that could influence the knowledge translation of innovations to reduce the burden of diabetes. Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Top 10 research priorities relating to stroke nursing: a rigorous approach to establish a national nurse-led research agenda.

PubMed

Rowat, Anne; Pollock, Alex; St George, Bridget; Cowey, Eileen; Booth, Joanne; Lawrence, Maggie

2016-11-01

To determine the top 10 research priorities specific to stroke nursing. It is important that stroke nurses build their research capability and capacity. This project built on a previous James Lind Alliance prioritization project, which established the shared stroke research priorities of stroke survivors, carers and health professionals. Research priority setting project using James Lind Alliance methods; a survey for interim prioritization and a consensus meeting for final priority setting. Between September - November 2014, stroke nurses were invited to select their top 10 priorities from a previously established list of 226 unique unanswered questions. These data were used to generate a list of shared research priorities (interim priority setting stage). A purposefully selected group of stroke nurses attended a final consensus meeting (April 2015) to determine the top 10 research priorities. During the interim prioritization stage, 97 stroke nurses identified 28 shared priority treatment uncertainties. At the final consensus meeting, 27 stroke nurses reached agreement on the top 10 stroke nursing research priorities. Five of the top 10 questions relate to stroke-specific impairments and five relate to rehabilitation and long-term consequences of stroke. The research agenda for stroke nursing has now been clearly defined, facilitating nurses to undertake research, which is of importance to stroke survivors and carers and central to supporting optimal recovery and quality of life after stroke. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Space Physics Cosmic & Heliospheric Data Evaluation Panel Report

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

McGuiere, R. E.; Cooper, J.; Gazis, P.; Kurth, W.; Lazarus, A.; McDonald, F.; McNutt, R.; Pyle, R.; Tsurutani, B. T.

1995-01-01

This Cosmic and Heliospheric (C&H) Data Evaluation Panel was charged with the task of identifying and prioritizing important C&H data sets. It was requested to provide C&H community input to the Space Physics Division for a program of revitalizing data holdings. Details and recommendations are provided. Highest C&H priority is assigned to Voyager, Pioneer, Helios, IMP-8, and ISEE-3 data.

Research priorities about stoma-related quality of life from the perspective of people with a stoma: A pilot survey.

PubMed

Hubbard, Gill; Taylor, Claire; Beeken, Becca; Campbell, Anna; Gracey, Jackie; Grimmett, Chloe; Fisher, Abi; Ozakinci, Gozde; Slater, Sarah; Gorely, Trish

2017-12-01

There is a recognized need to include patients in setting research priorities. Research priorities identified by people with a stoma are rarely elicited. To improve the quality of life of people with a stoma through use of evidence-based practice based on research priorities set by patients. Online pilot survey publicized in 2016 via United Kingdom stoma charities. People ranked nine stoma-related quality of life topics in order of research priority. People 16 years of age and over who currently have or have had a stoma for treatment for any medical condition. Distributions of the priority scores for each of the nine research topics were examined. Group differences were explored using either the Mann-Whitney U-test or the Kruskal-Wallis test depending on the number of groups. In total, 225 people completed the survey. The most important research priority was pouch leak problems and stoma bag/appliance problems followed by hernia risk. There were statistically significant differences in ranking research priorities between males and females, age, underlying disease that led to a stoma, stoma type and length of time with a stoma. People with a stoma are willing to engage in and set research priorities. The results should contribute towards future research about setting the research agenda for the study of stoma-related concerns that impact quality of life. © 2017 The Authors Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Setting priorities for reducing risk and advancing patient safety.

PubMed

Gaffey, Ann D

2016-04-01

We set priorities every day in both our personal and professional lives. Some decisions are easy, while others require much more thought, participation, and resources. The difficult or less appealing priorities may not be popular, may receive push-back, and may be resource intensive. Whether personal or professional, the urgency that accompanies true priorities becomes a driving force. It is that urgency to ensure our patients' safety that brings many of us to work each day. This is not easy work. It requires us to be knowledgeable about the enterprise we are working in and to have the professional skills and competence to facilitate setting the priorities that allow our organizations to minimize risk and maximize value. © 2016 American Society for Healthcare Risk Management of the American Hospital Association.

The quest for a framework for sustainable and institutionalised priority-setting for health research in a low-resource setting: the case of Zambia.

PubMed

Kapiriri, Lydia; Chanda-Kapata, Pascalina

2018-02-17

Priority-setting for health research in low-income countries remains a major challenge. While there have been efforts to systematise and improve the processes, most of the initiatives have ended up being a one-off exercise and are yet to be institutionalised. This could, in part, be attributed to the limited capacity for the priority-setting institutions to identify and fund their own research priorities, since most of the priority-setting initiatives are driven by experts. This paper reports findings from a pilot project whose aim was to develop a systematic process to identify components of a locally desirable and feasible health research priority-setting approach and to contribute to capacity strengthening for the Zambia National Health Research Authority. Synthesis of the current literature on the approaches to health research prioritisations. The results of the synthesis were presented and discussed with a sample of Zambian researchers and decision-makers who are involved in health research priority-setting. The ultimate aim was for them to explore the different approaches available for guiding health research priority-setting and to identify an approach that would be relevant and feasible to implement and sustain within the Zambian context. Based on the evidence that was presented, the participants were unable to identify one approach that met the criteria. They identified attributes from the different approaches that they thought would be most appropriate and proposed a process that they deemed feasible within the Zambian context. While it is easier to implement prioritisation based on one approach that the initiator might be interested in, researchers interested in capacity-building for health research priority-setting organisations should expose the low-income country participants to all approaches. Researchers ought to be aware that sometimes one shoe may not fit all, as in the case of Zambia, instead of choosing one approach, the stakeholders may select desirable attributes from the different approaches and piece together an approach that would be feasible and acceptable within their context. An approach that builds on the decision-makers' understanding of their contexts and their input to its development would foster local ownership and has a greater potential for sustainability.

29 CFR 1990.133 - Publication.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-07-01

... 29 Labor 9 2012-07-01 2012-07-01 false Publication. 1990.133 Section 1990.133 Labor Regulations...) IDENTIFICATION, CLASSIFICATION, AND REGULATION OF POTENTIAL OCCUPATIONAL CARCINOGENS Priority Setting § 1990.133... sought. Effective Date Note: At 48 FR 243, Jan. 4, 1983, § 1990.133 was stayed in order to evaluate the...

29 CFR 1990.133 - Publication.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-07-01

... 29 Labor 9 2011-07-01 2011-07-01 false Publication. 1990.133 Section 1990.133 Labor Regulations...) IDENTIFICATION, CLASSIFICATION, AND REGULATION OF POTENTIAL OCCUPATIONAL CARCINOGENS Priority Setting § 1990.133... sought. Effective Date Note: At 48 FR 243, Jan. 4, 1983, § 1990.133 was stayed in order to evaluate the...

USE OF TROUT LIVER SLICES TO ENHANCE MECHANISTIC INTERPRETATION OF ER BINDING FOR COST-EFFECTIVE PRIORITIZATION OF CHEMICALS WITHIN LARGE INVENTORIES

EPA Science Inventory

The cost of testing chemicals as reproductive toxicants precludes the possibility of evaluating large chemical inventories without a robust strategic approach for setting priorities. The use of quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSARs) in early hazard identification m...

The influence of power and actor relations on priority setting and resource allocation practices at the hospital level in Kenya: a case study.

PubMed

Barasa, Edwine W; Cleary, Susan; English, Mike; Molyneux, Sassy

2016-09-30

Priority setting and resource allocation in healthcare organizations often involves the balancing of competing interests and values in the context of hierarchical and politically complex settings with multiple interacting actor relationships. Despite this, few studies have examined the influence of actor and power dynamics on priority setting practices in healthcare organizations. This paper examines the influence of power relations among different actors on the implementation of priority setting and resource allocation processes in public hospitals in Kenya. We used a qualitative case study approach to examine priority setting and resource allocation practices in two public hospitals in coastal Kenya. We collected data by a combination of in-depth interviews of national level policy makers, hospital managers, and frontline practitioners in the case study hospitals (n = 72), review of documents such as hospital plans and budgets, minutes of meetings and accounting records, and non-participant observations in case study hospitals over a period of 7 months. We applied a combination of two frameworks, Norman Long's actor interface analysis and VeneKlasen and Miller's expressions of power framework to examine and interpret our findings RESULTS: The interactions of actors in the case study hospitals resulted in socially constructed interfaces between: 1) senior managers and middle level managers 2) non-clinical managers and clinicians, and 3) hospital managers and the community. Power imbalances resulted in the exclusion of middle level managers (in one of the hospitals) and clinicians and the community (in both hospitals) from decision making processes. This resulted in, amongst others, perceptions of unfairness, and reduced motivation in hospital staff. It also puts to question the legitimacy of priority setting processes in these hospitals. Designing hospital decision making structures to strengthen participation and inclusion of relevant stakeholders could improve priority setting practices. This should however, be accompanied by measures to empower stakeholders to contribute to decision making. Strengthening soft leadership skills of hospital managers could also contribute to managing the power dynamics among actors in hospital priority setting processes.

Improving district level health planning and priority setting in Tanzania through implementing accountability for reasonableness framework: Perceptions of stakeholders.

PubMed

Maluka, Stephen; Kamuzora, Peter; San Sebastián, Miguel; Byskov, Jens; Ndawi, Benedict; Hurtig, Anna-Karin

2010-12-01

In 2006, researchers and decision-makers launched a five-year project - Response to Accountable Priority Setting for Trust in Health Systems (REACT) - to improve planning and priority-setting through implementing the Accountability for Reasonableness framework in Mbarali District, Tanzania. The objective of this paper is to explore the acceptability of Accountability for Reasonableness from the perspectives of the Council Health Management Team, local government officials, health workforce and members of user boards and committees. Individual interviews were carried out with different categories of actors and stakeholders in the district. The interview guide consisted of a series of questions, asking respondents to describe their perceptions regarding each condition of the Accountability for Reasonableness framework in terms of priority setting. Interviews were analysed using thematic framework analysis. Documentary data were used to support, verify and highlight the key issues that emerged. Almost all stakeholders viewed Accountability for Reasonableness as an important and feasible approach for improving priority-setting and health service delivery in their context. However, a few aspects of Accountability for Reasonableness were seen as too difficult to implement given the socio-political conditions and traditions in Tanzania. Respondents mentioned: budget ceilings and guidelines, low level of public awareness, unreliable and untimely funding, as well as the limited capacity of the district to generate local resources as the major contextual factors that hampered the full implementation of the framework in their context. This study was one of the first assessments of the applicability of Accountability for Reasonableness in health care priority-setting in Tanzania. The analysis, overall, suggests that the Accountability for Reasonableness framework could be an important tool for improving priority-setting processes in the contexts of resource-poor settings. However, the full implementation of Accountability for Reasonableness would require a proper capacity-building plan, involving all relevant stakeholders, particularly members of the community since public accountability is the ultimate aim, and it is the community that will live with the consequences of priority-setting decisions.

29 CFR 1990.131 - Priority lists for regulating potential occupational carcinogens.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... POTENTIAL OCCUPATIONAL CARCINOGENS Priority Setting § 1990.131 Priority lists for regulating potential occupational carcinogens. The Secretary shall establish two priority lists for regulating potential... 29 Labor 9 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Priority lists for regulating potential occupational...

What Are the Top 10 Research Questions in the Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease? A Priority Setting Partnership with the James Lind Alliance.

PubMed

Hart, Ailsa L; Lomer, Miranda; Verjee, Azmina; Kemp, Karen; Faiz, Omar; Daly, Ann; Solomon, Julie; McLaughlin, John

2017-02-01

Many uncertainties remain regarding optimal therapies and strategies for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. Setting research priorities addressing therapies requires a partnership between health care professionals, patients and organisations supporting patients. We aimed to use the structure of the James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership, which has been used in other disease areas, to identify and prioritise unanswered questions about treatments for inflammatory bowel disease. The James Lind Priority Setting Partnership uses methods agreed and adopted in other disease areas to work with patients and clinicians: to identify uncertainties about treatments; to agree by consensus a prioritised list of uncertainties for research; then to translate these uncertainties into research questions which are amenable to hypothesis testing; and finally to take results to research commissioning bodies to be considered for funding. A total of 1636 uncertainties were collected in the initial survey from 531 respondents, which included 22% health care professionals and 78% patients and carers. Using the rigorously applied processes of the priority setting partnership, this list was distilled down to the top 10 research priorities for inflammatory bowel disease. The top priorities were: identifying treatment strategies to optimise efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness; and stratifying patients with regard to their disease course and treatment response. Diet and symptom control [pain, incontinence and fatigue] were also topics which were prioritised. A partnership involving multidisciplinary clinicians, patients and organisations supporting patients has identified the top 10 research priorities in the treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease. © European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation 2016.

Differences between Parkinson's and Huntington's diseases and their role for prioritization of stem cell-based treatments.

PubMed

Hug, K; Hermerén, G

2013-06-01

The problems of allocation of scarce resources and priority setting in health care have so far not been much studied in the context of stem cell-based therapeutic applications. If and when competitive cost effective stem cell-based therapies are available, the problem of priority setting - to whom should stem cellbased therapies be offered and on what grounds - is discussed in this article using the examples of Parkinson's Disease (PD) and Huntington's Disease (HD). The aim of this paper is to examine the presently known differences between PD and HD and analyze the role of these differences for setting priorities of stem cell-based therapeutic applications to treat these diseases. To achieve this aim, we (1) present the theoretical framework used in the analysis; (2) compare PD and HD in terms of health related and non-health related consequences of these diseases for patients, their relatives and third parties; (3) analyze the ethical relevance of observed differences for priority setting given different values and variables; (4) compare PD and HD in terms of social justice related consequences of stem cell-based therapies; and (5) analyze the ethical relevance of these differences for priority setting given different values and variables. We argue that the steps of analysis applied in this paper could be helpful when setting priorities among treatments of other diseases with similar differences as those between PD and HD.

IMPORTANCE OF MULTIPLE CRITERIA FOR PRIORITY SETTING OF HIV/AIDS INTERVENTIONS.

PubMed

Tromp, Noor; Prawiranegara, Rozar; Siregar, Adiatma; Sunjaya, Deni; Baltussen, Rob

2015-01-01

This study describes the views of various stakeholders on the importance of different criteria for priority setting of HIV/AIDS interventions in Indonesia. Based on a general list of criteria and a focus group discussion with stakeholders (n = 6), a list was developed of thirty-two criteria that play a role in priority setting in HIV/AIDS control in West-Java province. Criteria were categorized according to the World Health Organization's health system goals and building block frameworks. People living with HIV/AIDS (n = 49), healthcare workers (HCW) (n = 41), the general population (n = 43), and policy makers (n = 22) rated the importance of thirty-two criteria on a 5-point Likert-scale. Thereafter, respondents ranked the highest rated criteria to express more detailed preferences. Stakeholders valued the following criteria as most important for the priority setting of HIV/AIDS interventions: an intervention's impact on the HIV/AIDS epidemic, reduction of stigma, quality of care, effectiveness on individual level, and feasibility in terms of current capacity of the health system (i.e., HCW, product, information, and service requirements), financial sustainability, and acceptance by donors. Overall, stakeholders' preferences for the importance of criteria are similar. Our study design outlines an approach for other settings to identify which criteria are important for priority setting of health interventions. For Indonesia, these study results may be used in priority setting processes for HIV/AIDS control and may contribute to more transparent and systematic allocation of resources.

Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care.

PubMed

Stelfox, Henry T; Niven, Daniel J; Clement, Fiona M; Bagshaw, Sean M; Cook, Deborah J; McKenzie, Emily; Potestio, Melissa L; Doig, Christopher J; O'Neill, Barbara; Zygun, David

2015-01-01

Large amounts of scientific evidence are generated, but not implemented into patient care (the 'knowledge-to-care' gap). We identified and prioritized knowledge-to-care gaps in critical care as opportunities to improve the quality and value of healthcare. We used a multi-method community-based participatory research approach to engage a Network of all adult (n = 14) and pediatric (n = 2) medical-surgical intensive care units (ICUs) in a fully integrated geographically defined healthcare system serving 4 million residents. Participants included Network oversight committee members (n = 38) and frontline providers (n = 1,790). Network committee members used a modified RAND/University of California Appropriateness Methodology, to serially propose, rate (validated 9 point scale) and revise potential knowledge-to-care gaps as priorities for improvement. The priorities were sent to frontline providers for evaluation. Results were relayed back to all frontline providers for feedback. Initially, 68 knowledge-to-care gaps were proposed, rated and revised by the committee (n = 32 participants) over 3 rounds of review and resulted in 13 proposed priorities for improvement. Then, 1,103 providers (62% response rate) evaluated the priorities, and rated 9 as 'necessary' (median score 7-9). Several factors were associated with rating priorities as necessary in multivariable logistic regression, related to the provider (experience, teaching status of ICU) and topic (strength of supporting evidence, potential to benefit the patient, potential to improve patient/family experience, potential to decrease costs). A community-based participatory research approach engaged a diverse group of stakeholders to identify 9 priorities for improving the quality and value of critical care. The approach was time and cost efficient and could serve as a model to prioritize areas for research quality improvement across other settings.

An assessment of priority setting process and its implication on availability of emergency obstetric care services in Malindi District, Kenya.

PubMed

Nyandieka, Lilian Nyamusi; Kombe, Yeri; Ng'ang'a, Zipporah; Byskov, Jens; Njeru, Mercy Karimi

2015-01-01

In spite of the critical role of Emergency Obstetric Care in treating complications arising from pregnancy and childbirth, very few facilities are equipped in Kenya to offer this service. In Malindi, availability of EmOC services does not meet the UN recommended levels of at least one comprehensive and four basic EmOC facilities per 500,000 populations. This study was conducted to assess priority setting process and its implication on availability, access and use of EmOC services at the district level. A qualitative study was conducted both at health facility and community levels. Triangulation of data sources and methods was employed, where document reviews, in-depth interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with health personnel, facility committee members, stakeholders who offer and/ or support maternal health services and programmes; and the community members as end users. Data was thematically analysed. Limitations in the extent to which priorities in regard to maternal health services can be set at the district level were observed. The priority setting process was greatly restricted by guidelines and limited resources from the national level. Relevant stakeholders including community members are not involved in the priority setting process, thereby denying them the opportunity to contribute in the process. The findings illuminate that consideration of all local plans in national planning and budgeting as well as the involvement of all relevant stakeholders in the priority setting exercise is essential in order to achieve a consensus on the provision of emergency obstetric care services among other health service priorities.

40 CFR 146.9 - Criteria for establishing permitting priorities.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

....9 Criteria for establishing permitting priorities. In determining priorities for setting times for... priorities. 146.9 Section 146.9 Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CONTINUED) WATER... (a), (c), (g) or § 144.22(f), the Director shall base these priorities upon consideration of the...

Towards deep inclusion for equity-oriented health research priority-setting: A working model.

PubMed

Pratt, Bridget; Merritt, Maria; Hyder, Adnan A

2016-02-01

Growing consensus that health research funders should align their investments with national research priorities presupposes that such national priorities exist and are just. Arguably, justice requires national health research priority-setting to promote health equity. Such a position is consistent with recommendations made by the World Health Organization and at global ministerial summits that health research should serve to reduce health inequalities between and within countries. Thus far, no specific requirements for equity-oriented research priority-setting have been described to guide policymakers. As a step towards the explication and defence of such requirements, we propose that deep inclusion is a key procedural component of equity-oriented research priority-setting. We offer a model of deep inclusion that was developed by applying concepts from work on deliberative democracy and development ethics. This model consists of three dimensions--breadth, qualitative equality, and high-quality non-elite participation. Deep inclusion is captured not only by who is invited to join a decision-making process but also by how they are involved and by when non-elite stakeholders are involved. To clarify and illustrate the proposed dimensions, we use the sustained example of health systems research. We conclude by reviewing practical challenges to achieving deep inclusion. Despite the existence of barriers to implementation, our model can help policymakers and other stakeholders design more inclusive national health research priority-setting processes and assess these processes' depth of inclusion. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Integrating economic costs and biological traits into global conservation priorities for carnivores.

PubMed

Loyola, Rafael Dias; Oliveira-Santos, Luiz Gustavo Rodrigues; Almeida-Neto, Mário; Nogueira, Denise Martins; Kubota, Umberto; Diniz-Filho, José Alexandre Felizola; Lewinsohn, Thomas Michael

2009-08-27

Prioritization schemes usually highlight species-rich areas, where many species are at imminent risk of extinction. To be ecologically relevant these schemes should also include species biological traits into area-setting methods. Furthermore, in a world of limited funds for conservation, conservation action is constrained by land acquisition costs. Hence, including economic costs into conservation priorities can substantially improve their conservation cost-effectiveness. We examined four global conservation scenarios for carnivores based on the joint mapping of economic costs and species biological traits. These scenarios identify the most cost-effective priority sets of ecoregions, indicating best investment opportunities for safeguarding every carnivore species, and also establish priority sets that can maximize species representation in areas harboring highly vulnerable species. We compared these results with a scenario that minimizes the total number of ecoregions required for conserving all species, irrespective of other factors. We found that cost-effective conservation investments should focus on 41 ecoregions highlighted in the scenario that consider simultaneously both ecoregion vulnerability and economic costs of land acquisition. Ecoregions included in priority sets under these criteria should yield best returns of investments since they harbor species with high extinction risk and have lower mean land cost. Our study highlights ecoregions of particular importance for the conservation of the world's carnivores defining global conservation priorities in analyses that encompass socioeconomic and life-history factors. We consider the identification of a comprehensive priority-set of areas as a first step towards an in-situ biodiversity maintenance strategy.

Task Prioritization in Dual-Tasking: Instructions versus Preferences

PubMed Central

Jansen, Reinier J.; van Egmond, René; de Ridder, Huib

2016-01-01

The role of task prioritization in performance tradeoffs during multi-tasking has received widespread attention. However, little is known on whether people have preferences regarding tasks, and if so, whether these preferences conflict with priority instructions. Three experiments were conducted with a high-speed driving game and an auditory memory task. In Experiment 1, participants did not receive priority instructions. Participants performed different sequences of single-task and dual-task conditions. Task performance was evaluated according to participants’ retrospective accounts on preferences. These preferences were reformulated as priority instructions in Experiments 2 and 3. The results showed that people differ in their preferences regarding task prioritization in an experimental setting, which can be overruled by priority instructions, but only after increased dual-task exposure. Additional measures of mental effort showed that performance tradeoffs had an impact on mental effort. The interpretation of these findings was used to explore an extension of Threaded Cognition Theory with Hockey’s Compensatory Control Model. PMID:27391779

The contention within health economics: a micro-economic foundation using a macro-economic analysis.

PubMed

Yaxley, I L

1998-03-01

Health economists claim to use market economics combined with the micro-economic concepts of opportunity cost and the margin to advise on priority setting. However, they are advising on setting priorities through a macro-economic analysis using the costs of the supplier, thus prioritising the producer and not the consumer as the dynamic of economic activity. For health economists any contention within priority setting is due to lack of data not their confusion over fundamental concepts.

Applying operational research and data mining to performance based medical personnel motivation system.

PubMed

Niaksu, Olegas; Zaptorius, Jonas

2014-01-01

This paper presents the methodology suitable for creation of a performance related remuneration system in healthcare sector, which would meet requirements for efficiency and sustainable quality of healthcare services. Methodology for performance indicators selection, ranking and a posteriori evaluation has been proposed and discussed. Priority Distribution Method is applied for unbiased performance criteria weighting. Data mining methods are proposed to monitor and evaluate the results of motivation system.We developed a method for healthcare specific criteria selection consisting of 8 steps; proposed and demonstrated application of Priority Distribution Method for the selected criteria weighting. Moreover, a set of data mining methods for evaluation of the motivational system outcomes was proposed. The described methodology for calculating performance related payment needs practical approbation. We plan to develop semi-automated tools for institutional and personal performance indicators monitoring. The final step would be approbation of the methodology in a healthcare facility.

High resolution tsunami modelling for the evaluation of potential risk areas in Setúbal (Portugal)

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Ribeiro, J.; Silva, A.; Leitão, P.

2011-08-01

The use of high resolution hydrodynamic modelling to simulate the potential effects of tsunami events can provide relevant information about the most probable inundation areas. Moreover, the consideration of complementary data such as the type of buildings, location of priority equipment, type of roads, enables mapping of the most vulnerable zones, computing of the expected damage on man-made structures, constrain of the definition of rescue areas and escape routes, adaptation of emergency plans and proper evaluation of the vulnerability associated with different areas and/or equipment. Such an approach was used to evaluate the specific risks associated with a potential occurrence of a tsunami event in the region of Setúbal (Portugal), which was one of the areas most seriously affected by the 1755 tsunami. In order to perform an evaluation of the hazard associated with the occurrence of a similar event, high resolution wave propagation simulations were performed considering different potential earthquake sources with different magnitudes. Based on these simulations, detailed inundation maps associated with the different events were produced. These results were combined with the available information on the vulnerability of the local infrastructures (building types, roads and streets characteristics, priority buildings) in order to impose restrictions in the production of high-scale potential damage maps, escape routes and emergency routes maps.

Resource allocation in road infrastructure using ANP priorities with ZOGP formulation-A case study

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Alias, Suriana; Adna, Norfarziah; Soid, Siti Khuzaimah; Kardri, Mahani

2013-09-01

Road Infrastructure (RI) project evaluation and selection is concern with the allocation of scarce organizational resources. In this paper, it is suggest an improved RI project selection methodology which reflects interdependencies among evaluation criteria and candidate projects. Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM) is use to evoking expert group opinion and also to determine a degree of interdependences relationship between the alternative projects. In order to provide a systematic approach to set priorities among multi-criteria and trade-off among objectives, Analytic Network Process (ANP) is suggested to be applied prior to Zero-One Goal Programming (ZOGP) formulation. Specifically, this paper demonstrated how to combined FDM and ANP with ZOGP through a real-world RI empirical example on an ongoing decision-making project in Johor, Malaysia.

Involving patients in setting priorities for healthcare improvement: a cluster randomized trial

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background Patients are increasingly seen as active partners in healthcare. While patient involvement in individual clinical decisions has been extensively studied, no trial has assessed how patients can effectively be involved in collective healthcare decisions affecting the population. The goal of this study was to test the impact of involving patients in setting healthcare improvement priorities for chronic care at the community level. Methods Design: Cluster randomized controlled trial. Local communities were randomized in intervention (priority setting with patient involvement) and control sites (no patient involvement). Setting: Communities in a canadian region were required to set priorities for improving chronic disease management in primary care, from a list of 37 validated quality indicators. Intervention: Patients were consulted in writing, before participating in face-to-face deliberation with professionals. Control: Professionals established priorities among themselves, without patient involvement. Participants: A total of 172 individuals from six communities participated in the study, including 83 chronic disease patients, and 89 health professionals. Outcomes: The primary outcome was the level of agreement between patients’ and professionals’ priorities. Secondary outcomes included professionals’ intention to use the selected quality indicators, and the costs of patient involvement. Results Priorities established with patients were more aligned with core generic components of the Medical Home and Chronic Care Model, including: access to primary care, self-care support, patient participation in clinical decisions, and partnership with community organizations (p < 0.01). Priorities established by professionals alone placed more emphasis on the technical quality of single disease management. The involvement intervention fostered mutual influence between patients and professionals, which resulted in a 41% increase in agreement on common priorities (95%CI: +12% to +58%, p < 0.01). Professionals’ intention to use the selected quality indicators was similar in intervention and control sites. Patient involvement increased the costs of the prioritization process by 17%, and required 10% more time to reach consensus on common priorities. Conclusions Patient involvement can change priorities driving healthcare improvement at the population level. Future research should test the generalizability of these findings to other contexts, and assess its impact on patient care. Trial registration The Netherlands National Trial Register #NTR2496. PMID:24555508

Shared research priorities for pessary use in women with prolapse: results from a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership

PubMed Central

Hagen, Suzanne; McClurg, Doreen; Pollock, Alex

2018-01-01

Objectives To identify the shared priorities for future research of women affected by and clinicians involved with pessary use for the management of prolapse. Design A priority setting project using a consensus method. Setting A James Lind Alliance Pessary use for prolapse Priority Setting Partnership (JLA Pessary PSP) conducted from May 2016 to September 2017 in the UK. Participants The PSP was run by a Steering Group of three women with experience of pessary use, three experienced clinicians involved with management of prolapse, two researchers with relevant experience, a JLA adviser and a PSP leader. Two surveys were conducted in 2016 and 2017. The first gathered questions about pessaries, and the second asked respondents to prioritise a list of questions. A final workshop was held on 8 September 2017 involving 10 women and 13 clinician representatives with prolapse and pessary experience. Results A top 10 list of priorities for future research in pessary use for prolapse was agreed by consensus. Conclusions Women with experience of pessary use and clinicians involved with prolapse management have worked together to determine shared priorities for future research. Aligning the top 10 results with existing research findings will highlight the gaps in current evidence and signpost future research to areas of priority. Effective dissemination of the results will enable research funding bodies to focus on gathering the evidence to answer the questions that matter most to those who will be affected. PMID:29705767

49 CFR 554.7 - Investigation priorities.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... Investigation priorities. (a) Compliance investigation priorities are reviewed annually and are set according to... 49 Transportation 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Investigation priorities. 554.7 Section 554.7 Transportation Other Regulations Relating to Transportation (Continued) NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY...

45 CFR 1620.7 - Reporting.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... priorities; mechanisms which will be utilized to ensure effective client participation in priority-setting... Regulations Relating to Public Welfare (Continued) LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION PRIORITIES IN USE OF RESOURCES... information on all emergency cases or matters undertaken that were not within the recipient's priorities, and...

Development of a new model to engage patients and clinicians in setting research priorities.

PubMed

Pollock, Alex; St George, Bridget; Fenton, Mark; Crowe, Sally; Firkins, Lester

2014-01-01

Equitable involvement of patients and clinicians in setting research and funding priorities is ethically desirable and can improve the quality, relevance and implementation of research. Survey methods used in previous priority setting projects to gather treatment uncertainties may not be sufficient to facilitate responses from patients and their lay carers for some health care topics. We aimed to develop a new model to engage patients and clinicians in setting research priorities relating to life after stroke, and to explore the use of this model within a James Lind Alliance (JLA) priority setting project. We developed a model to facilitate involvement through targeted engagement and assisted involvement (FREE TEA model). We implemented both standard surveys and the FREE TEA model to gather research priorities (treatment uncertainties) from people affected by stroke living in Scotland. We explored and configured the number of treatment uncertainties elicited from different groups by the two approaches. We gathered 516 treatment uncertainties from stroke survivors, carers and health professionals. We achieved approximately equal numbers of contributions; 281 (54%) from stroke survivors/carers; 235 (46%) from health professionals. For stroke survivors and carers, 98 (35%) treatment uncertainties were elicited from the standard survey and 183 (65%) at FREE TEA face-to-face visits. This contrasted with the health professionals for whom 198 (84%) were elicited from the standard survey and only 37 (16%) from FREE TEA visits. The FREE TEA model has implications for future priority setting projects and user-involvement relating to populations of people with complex health needs. Our results imply that reliance on standard surveys may result in poor and unrepresentative involvement of patients, thereby favouring the views of health professionals.

29 CFR 4044.14 - Priority category 4 benefits.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... priority category 4 with respect to a participant is not limited by the aggregate benefits limitations set... 29 Labor 9 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Priority category 4 benefits. 4044.14 Section 4044.14 Labor... Priority category 4 benefits. The benefits assigned to priority category 4 with respect to each participant...

75 FR 146 - Public Comment on Candidate National Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Priorities for Fiscal...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-01-04

... Assurance, is collecting external comment on a set of candidate enforcement and compliance priorities for FY... National Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Priorities for Fiscal Years 2011-2013 AGENCY: Environmental... national priorities to be addressed for fiscal years 2011-2013. EPA selects these priority areas every...

10 CFR 600.111 - Pre-award policies.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... and Priority Setting. DOE will, whenever practical, notify the public of its intended funding priorities for discretionary grant programs, unless funding priorities are established by Federal statute. ...

Waiting for cataract surgery--effects of a maximum waiting-time guarantee.

PubMed

Hanning, Marianne; Lundström, Mats

2007-01-01

To evaluate the effects of the Maximum Waiting-time Guarantee (MWG) policy for cataract surgery on volume, indications, waiting times and priority setting in Sweden. Comparison between 1993 and 1994, when the guarantee had been in force for one year, and 1998 and 1999, when the policy had been terminated for one year. Data from the National Cataract Registry covering 156,657 cataract operations for the years studied. The number of operations increased by 43% between the two study periods. Of this increase, 61% were patients with a visual acuity above 0.5 in the better eye, i.e. low-priority patients. Waiting times were longer for all patient categories in the later period and differences in waiting times between patients with differing priority diminished. Variations among the units in priority setting and waiting times were substantial, and increased after the Guarantee was terminated. The Guarantee with its explicit indications was an effective policy instrument to limit waiting times and improve access for patients with the greatest need. It is unlikely that the Guarantee caused any 'crowding out' of other patient groups. When the Guarantee was not in force, indications for surgery widened. This, however, resulted in longer waiting times for all patient groups. After the Guarantee was terminated, the already substantial differences in access and indications among ophthalmic units became even greater.

Managing in-hospital quality improvement: An importance-performance analysis to set priorities for ST-elevation myocardial infarction care.

PubMed

Aeyels, Daan; Seys, Deborah; Sinnaeve, Peter R; Claeys, Marc J; Gevaert, Sofie; Schoors, Danny; Sermeus, Walter; Panella, Massimiliano; Bruyneel, Luk; Vanhaecht, Kris

2018-02-01

A focus on specific priorities increases the success rate of quality improvement efforts for broad and complex-care processes. Importance-performance analysis presents a possible approach to set priorities around which to design and implement effective quality improvement initiatives. Persistent variation in hospital performance makes ST-elevation myocardial infarction care relevant to consider for importance-performance analysis. The purpose of this study was to identify quality improvement priorities in ST-elevation myocardial infarction care. Importance and performance levels of ST-elevation myocardial infarction key interventions were combined in an importance-performance analysis. Content validity indexes on 23 ST-elevation myocardial infarction key interventions of a multidisciplinary RAND Delphi Survey defined importance levels. Structured review of 300 patient records in 15 acute hospitals determined performance levels. The significance of between-hospital variation was determined by a Kruskal-Wallis test. A performance heat-map allowed for hospital-specific priority setting. Seven key interventions were each rated as an overall improvement priority. Priority key interventions related to risk assessment, timely reperfusion by percutaneous coronary intervention and secondary prevention. Between-hospital performance varied significantly for the majority of key interventions. The type and number of priorities varied strongly across hospitals. Guideline adherence in ST-elevation myocardial infarction care is low and improvement priorities vary between hospitals. Importance-performance analysis helps clinicians and management in demarcation of the nature, number and order of improvement priorities. By offering a tailored improvement focus, this methodology makes improvement efforts more specific and achievable.

38 CFR 49.11 - Pre-award policies.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

...) Public notice and priority setting. Federal awarding agencies shall notify the public of its intended funding priorities for discretionary grant programs, unless funding priorities are established by Federal...

29 CFR 95.11 - Pre-award policies.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... policies. Public Notice and Priority Setting. Federal awarding agencies shall notify the public of its intended funding priorities for discretionary grant programs, unless funding priorities are established by...

Setting Research Priorities for Kidney Cancer.

PubMed

Jones, Jennifer M; Bhatt, Jaimin; Avery, Jonathan; Laupacis, Andreas; Cowan, Katherine; Basappa, Naveen S; Basiuk, Joan; Canil, Christina; Al-Asaaed, Sohaib; Heng, Daniel Y C; Wood, Lori; Stacey, Dawn; Kollmannsberger, Christian; Jewett, Michael A S

2017-12-01

Defining disease-specific research priorities in cancer can facilitate better allocation of limited resources. Involving patients and caregivers as well as expert clinicians in this process is of value. We undertook this approach for kidney cancer as an example. The Kidney Cancer Research Network of Canada sponsored a collaborative consensus-based priority-setting partnership that identified ten research priorities in the management of kidney cancer. These are discussed in the context of current initiatives and gaps in knowledge. Copyright © 2017 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Priority-setting in public health research funding organisations: an exploratory qualitative study among five high-profile funders.

PubMed

Cartier, Yuri; Creatore, Maria I; Hoffman, Steven J; Potvin, Louise

2018-06-22

Priority-driven funding streams for population and public health are an important part of the health research landscape and contribute to orienting future scholarship in the field. While research priorities are often made public through targeted calls for research, less is known about how research funding organisations arrive at said priorities. Our objective was to explore how public health research funding organisations develop priorities for strategic extramural research funding programmes. Content analysis of published academic and grey literature and key informant interviews for five public and private funders of public health research in the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States and France were performed. We found important distinctions in how funding organisations processed potential research priorities through four non-sequential phases, namely idea generation, idea analysis, idea socialisation and idea selection. Funders generally involved the public health research community and public health decision-makers in idea generation and socialisation, but other groups of stakeholders (e.g. the public, advocacy organisations) were not as frequently included. Priority-setting for strategic funding programmes in public health research involves consultation mainly with researchers in the early phase of the process. There is an opportunity for greater breadth of participation and more transparency in priority-setting mechanisms for strategic funding programmes in population and public health research.

29 CFR 1990.131 - Priority lists for regulating potential occupational carcinogens.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-07-01

... carcinogens. 1990.131 Section 1990.131 Labor Regulations Relating to Labor (Continued) OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND... POTENTIAL OCCUPATIONAL CARCINOGENS Priority Setting § 1990.131 Priority lists for regulating potential occupational carcinogens. The Secretary shall establish two priority lists for regulating potential...

29 CFR 1990.131 - Priority lists for regulating potential occupational carcinogens.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-07-01

... carcinogens. 1990.131 Section 1990.131 Labor Regulations Relating to Labor (Continued) OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND... POTENTIAL OCCUPATIONAL CARCINOGENS Priority Setting § 1990.131 Priority lists for regulating potential occupational carcinogens. The Secretary shall establish two priority lists for regulating potential...

29 CFR 1990.131 - Priority lists for regulating potential occupational carcinogens.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-07-01

... carcinogens. 1990.131 Section 1990.131 Labor Regulations Relating to Labor (Continued) OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND... POTENTIAL OCCUPATIONAL CARCINOGENS Priority Setting § 1990.131 Priority lists for regulating potential occupational carcinogens. The Secretary shall establish two priority lists for regulating potential...

29 CFR 1990.131 - Priority lists for regulating potential occupational carcinogens.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-07-01

... carcinogens. 1990.131 Section 1990.131 Labor Regulations Relating to Labor (Continued) OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND... POTENTIAL OCCUPATIONAL CARCINOGENS Priority Setting § 1990.131 Priority lists for regulating potential occupational carcinogens. The Secretary shall establish two priority lists for regulating potential...

Weighted Fuzzy Risk Priority Number Evaluation of Turbine and Compressor Blades Considering Failure Mode Correlations

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Gan, Luping; Li, Yan-Feng; Zhu, Shun-Peng; Yang, Yuan-Jian; Huang, Hong-Zhong

2014-06-01

Failure mode, effects and criticality analysis (FMECA) and Fault tree analysis (FTA) are powerful tools to evaluate reliability of systems. Although single failure mode issue can be efficiently addressed by traditional FMECA, multiple failure modes and component correlations in complex systems cannot be effectively evaluated. In addition, correlated variables and parameters are often assumed to be precisely known in quantitative analysis. In fact, due to the lack of information, epistemic uncertainty commonly exists in engineering design. To solve these problems, the advantages of FMECA, FTA, fuzzy theory, and Copula theory are integrated into a unified hybrid method called fuzzy probability weighted geometric mean (FPWGM) risk priority number (RPN) method. The epistemic uncertainty of risk variables and parameters are characterized by fuzzy number to obtain fuzzy weighted geometric mean (FWGM) RPN for single failure mode. Multiple failure modes are connected using minimum cut sets (MCS), and Boolean logic is used to combine fuzzy risk priority number (FRPN) of each MCS. Moreover, Copula theory is applied to analyze the correlation of multiple failure modes in order to derive the failure probabilities of each MCS. Compared to the case where dependency among multiple failure modes is not considered, the Copula modeling approach eliminates the error of reliability analysis. Furthermore, for purpose of quantitative analysis, probabilities importance weight from failure probabilities are assigned to FWGM RPN to reassess the risk priority, which generalize the definition of probability weight and FRPN, resulting in a more accurate estimation than that of the traditional models. Finally, a basic fatigue analysis case drawn from turbine and compressor blades in aeroengine is used to demonstrate the effectiveness and robustness of the presented method. The result provides some important insights on fatigue reliability analysis and risk priority assessment of structural system under failure correlations.

Tropical montane cloud forests: current threats and opportunities for their conservation and sustainable management in Mexico.

PubMed

Toledo-Aceves, Tarin; Meave, Jorge A; González-Espinosa, Mario; Ramírez-Marcial, Neptalí

2011-03-01

Tropical montane cloud forests (TMCF) are among the most threatened ecosystems globally in spite of their high strategic value for sustainable development due to the key role played by these forests in hydrological cycle maintenance and as reservoirs of endemic biodiversity. Resources for effective conservation and management programs are rarely sufficient, and criteria must be applied to prioritize TMCF for conservation action. This paper reports a priority analysis of the 13 main regions of TMCF distribution in Mexico, based on four criteria: (1) forest quality, (2) threats to forest permanence, (3) threats to forest integrity, and (4) opportunities for conservation. Due to the diverse socio-environmental conditions of the local communities living in Mexican TMCF regions, their associated social characteristics were also evaluated to provide a background for the planning of conservation actions. A set of indicators was defined for the measurement of each criterion. To assign priority values for subregions within each main region, an international team of 40 participants evaluated all the indicators using multicriteria decision-making analysis. This procedure enabled the identification of 15 subregions of critical priority, 17 of high priority, and 10 of medium priority; three more were not analysed due to lack of information. The evaluation revealed a number of subjects that had hitherto been undetected and that may prove useful for prioritization efforts in other regions where TMCF is similarly documented and faces equally severe threats. Based on this analysis, key recommendations are outlined to advance conservation objectives in those TMCF areas that are subjected to high pressure on forest resources. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Setting stroke research priorities: The consumer perspective.

PubMed

Sangvatanakul, Pukkaporn; Hillege, Sharon; Lalor, Erin; Levi, Christopher; Hill, Kelvin; Middleton, Sandy

2010-12-01

To test a method of engaging consumers in research priority-setting using a quantitative approach and to determine consumer views on stroke research priorities for clinical practice recommendations with lower levels of evidence (Level III and Level IV) and expert consensus opinion as published in the Australian stroke clinical practice guidelines. Survey Urban community Eighteen stroke survivors (n = 12) and carers (n = 6) who were members of the "Working Aged Group - Stroke" (WAGS) consumer support group. Phase I: Participants were asked whether recommendations were "worth" researching ("yes" or "no"); and, if researched, what potential impact they likely would have on patient outcomes. Phase II: Participants were asked to rank recommendations rated by more than 75% of participants in Phase I as "worth" researching and "highly likely" or "likely" to generate research with a significant effect on patient outcomes (n = 13) in order of priority for future stroke research. All recommendations were rated by at least half (n = 9, 50%) of participants as "worth" researching. The majority (67% to 100%) rated all recommendations as "highly likely" or "likely" that research would have a significant effect on patient outcomes. Thirteen out of 20 recommendations were ranked for their research priorities. Recommendations under the topic heading Getting to hospital were ranked highest and Organization of care and Living with stroke were ranked as a lower priority for research. This study provided an example of how to involve consumers in research priority setting successfully using a quantitative approach. Stroke research priorities from the consumer perspective were different from those of health professionals, as published in the literature; thus, consumer opinion should be considered when setting research priorities. Copyright © 2010 Society for Vascular Nursing, Inc. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Integrating Economic Costs and Biological Traits into Global Conservation Priorities for Carnivores

PubMed Central

Loyola, Rafael Dias; Oliveira-Santos, Luiz Gustavo Rodrigues; Almeida-Neto, Mário; Nogueira, Denise Martins; Kubota, Umberto; Diniz-Filho, José Alexandre Felizola; Lewinsohn, Thomas Michael

2009-01-01

Background Prioritization schemes usually highlight species-rich areas, where many species are at imminent risk of extinction. To be ecologically relevant these schemes should also include species biological traits into area-setting methods. Furthermore, in a world of limited funds for conservation, conservation action is constrained by land acquisition costs. Hence, including economic costs into conservation priorities can substantially improve their conservation cost-effectiveness. Methodology/Principal Findings We examined four global conservation scenarios for carnivores based on the joint mapping of economic costs and species biological traits. These scenarios identify the most cost-effective priority sets of ecoregions, indicating best investment opportunities for safeguarding every carnivore species, and also establish priority sets that can maximize species representation in areas harboring highly vulnerable species. We compared these results with a scenario that minimizes the total number of ecoregions required for conserving all species, irrespective of other factors. We found that cost-effective conservation investments should focus on 41 ecoregions highlighted in the scenario that consider simultaneously both ecoregion vulnerability and economic costs of land acquisition. Ecoregions included in priority sets under these criteria should yield best returns of investments since they harbor species with high extinction risk and have lower mean land cost. Conclusions/Significance Our study highlights ecoregions of particular importance for the conservation of the world's carnivores defining global conservation priorities in analyses that encompass socioeconomic and life-history factors. We consider the identification of a comprehensive priority-set of areas as a first step towards an in-situ biodiversity maintenance strategy. PMID:19710911

40 CFR 30.11 - Pre-award policies.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... and priority setting. EPA shall notify the public of its intended funding priorities for discretionary grant programs, unless funding priorities are established by Federal statute. (c) By submitting an...

2 CFR 215.11 - Pre-award policies.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... Government. (b) Public Notice and Priority Setting. Federal awarding agencies shall notify the public of its intended funding priorities for discretionary grant programs, unless funding priorities are established by...

The kidney cancer research priority-setting partnership: Identifying the top 10 research priorities as defined by patients, caregivers, and expert clinicians.

PubMed

Jones, Jennifer; Bhatt, Jaimin; Avery, Jonathan; Laupacis, Andreas; Cowan, Katherine; Basappa, Naveen; Basiuk, Joan; Canil, Christina; Al-Asaaed, Sohaib; Heng, Daniel; Wood, Lori; Stacey, Dawn; Kollmannsberger, Christian; Jewett, Michael A S

2017-12-01

It is critically important to define disease-specific research priorities to better allocate limited resources. There is growing recognition of the value of involving patients and caregivers, as well as expert clinicians in this process. To our knowledge, this has not been done this way for kidney cancer. Using the transparent and inclusive process established by the James Lind Alliance, the Kidney Cancer Research Network of Canada (KCRNC) sponsored a collaborative consensus-based priority-setting partnership (PSP) to identify research priorities in the management of kidney cancer. The final result was identification of 10 research priorities for kidney cancer, which are discussed in the context of current initiatives and gaps in knowledge. This process provided a systematic and effective way to collaboratively establish research priorities with patients, caregivers, and clinicians, and provides a valuable resource for researchers and funding agencies.

37 CFR 1.451 - The priority claim and priority document in an international application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... set forth in § 1.19(b)(1). (c) If a certified copy of the priority document is not submitted together... 37 Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights 1 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false The priority claim and priority document in an international application. 1.451 Section 1.451 Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights...

Strategic emphases for tropical diseases research: a TDR perspective.

PubMed

Remme, Jan H F; Blas, Erik; Chitsulo, Lester; Desjeux, Philippe M P; Engers, Howard D; Kanyok, Thomas P; Kengeya Kayondo, Jane F; Kioy, Deborah W; Kumaraswami, Vasanthapuram; Lazdins, Janis K; Nunn, Paul P; Oduola, Ayoade; Ridley, Robert G; Toure, Yeya T; Zicker, Fabio; Morel, Carlos M

2002-10-01

Setting priorities for health research is a difficult task, especially for the neglected diseases of the poor. A new approach to priority setting for tropical diseases research has been adopted by the UNDP/World Bank/WHO Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (known as the TDR). Priorities are defined on the basis of a comprehensive analysis of research needs and research opportunities for each of the ten major tropical diseases in the TDR portfolio. The resulting strategic emphases matrix reflects the priorities for tropical diseases research from the perspective of the TDR. Its purpose is not to impose global research priorities, but we believe the results could be useful to other organizations.

Patient-centered priorities for improving medication management and adherence.

PubMed

McMullen, Carmit K; Safford, Monika M; Bosworth, Hayden B; Phansalkar, Shobha; Leong, Amye; Fagan, Maureen B; Trontell, Anne; Rumptz, Maureen; Vandermeer, Meredith L; Brinkman, William B; Burkholder, Rebecca; Frank, Lori; Hommel, Kevin; Mathews, Robin; Hornbrook, Mark C; Seid, Michael; Fordis, Michael; Lambert, Bruce; McElwee, Newell; Singh, Jasvinder A

2015-01-01

The Centers for Education and Research on Therapeutics convened a workshop to examine the scientific evidence on medication adherence interventions from the patient-centered perspective and to explore the potential of patient-centered medication management to improve chronic disease treatment. Patients, providers, researchers, and other stakeholders (N = 28) identified and prioritized ideas for future research and practice. We analyzed stakeholder voting on priorities and reviewed themes in workshop discussions. Ten priority areas emerged. Three areas were highly rated by all stakeholder groups: creating tools and systems to facilitate and evaluate patient-centered medication management plans; developing training on patient-centered prescribing for providers; and increasing patients' knowledge about medication management. However, priorities differed across stakeholder groups. Notably, patients prioritized using peer support to improve medication management while researchers did not. Engaging multiple stakeholders in setting a patient-centered research agenda and broadening the scope of adherence interventions to include other aspects of medication management resulted in priorities outside the traditional scope of adherence research. Workshop participants recognized the potential benefits of patient-centered medication management but also identified many challenges to implementation that require additional research and innovation. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

75 FR 70752 - Reliability Monitoring, Enforcement and Compliance Issues; Announcement of Panelists for...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-11-18

... the Regional Entities set priorities of what to audit, and are they doing a good job setting priorities? Do audits focus too much on documentation? Would alternative auditing methods also demonstrate...

[Planning driven by health priorities. Master planning criteria].

PubMed

Tresserras, Ricard

2008-12-01

With the aim of responding to a number of problems detected in health plan evaluations, a new direction has been proposed in Catalonia which would lead to the improved unification of the strategic and operational approaches, and leadership. The master plans that tackle those health problems with the greatest impact were created along these lines. This article presents the most salient aspects of the master plans for oncology, circulatory diseases, mental health and addictions, immigration and the field of social healthcare. Their organisational structure, mission and functions are presented, commenting on the prioritisation of activities and the principal benchmark elements of the healthcare model in the definition of planning criteria for services incorporated into the Health Map. Finally, mention is made of the evaluation procedures. The in-depth study of priority settings has resulted in significant progress towards unifying health and service planning.

Setting Priorities for Monitoring and Managing Non-native Plants: Toward a Practical Approach.

PubMed

Koch, Christiane; Jeschke, Jonathan M; Overbeck, Gerhard E; Kollmann, Johannes

2016-09-01

Land managers face the challenge to set priorities in monitoring and managing non-native plant species, as resources are limited and not all non-natives become invasive. Existing frameworks that have been proposed to rank non-native species require extensive information on their distribution, abundance, and impact. This information is difficult to obtain and often not available for many species and regions. National watch or priority lists are helpful, but it is questionable whether they provide sufficient information for environmental management on a regional scale. We therefore propose a decision tree that ranks species based on more simple albeit robust information, but still provides reliable management recommendations. To test the decision tree, we collected and evaluated distribution data from non-native plants in highland grasslands of Southern Brazil. We compared the results with a national list from the Brazilian Invasive Species Database for the state to discuss advantages and disadvantages of the different approaches on a regional scale. Out of 38 non-native species found, only four were also present on the national list. If management would solely rely on this list, many species that were identified as spreading based on the decision tree would go unnoticed. With the suggested scheme, it is possible to assign species to active management, to monitoring, or further evaluation. While national lists are certainly important, management on a regional scale should employ additional tools that adequately consider the actual risk of non-natives to become invasive.

Assessing and Improving Performance: A Longitudinal Evaluation of Priority Setting and Resource Allocation in a Canadian Health Region

PubMed Central

Hall, William; Smith, Neale; Mitton, Craig; Urquhart, Bonnie; Bryan, Stirling

2018-01-01

Background: In order to meet the challenges presented by increasing demand and scarcity of resources, healthcare organizations are faced with difficult decisions related to resource allocation. Tools to facilitate evaluation and improvement of these processes could enable greater transparency and more optimal distribution of resources. Methods: The Resource Allocation Performance Assessment Tool (RAPAT) was implemented in a healthcare organization in British Columbia, Canada. Recommendations for improvement were delivered, and a follow up evaluation exercise was conducted to assess the trajectory of the organization’s priority setting and resource allocation (PSRA) process 2 years post the original evaluation. Results: Implementation of RAPAT in the pilot organization identified strengths and weaknesses of the organization’s PSRA process at the time of the original evaluation. Strengths included the use of criteria and evidence, an ability to reallocate resources, and the involvement of frontline staff in the process. Weaknesses included training, communication, and lack of program budgeting. Although the follow up revealed a regression from a more formal PSRA process, a legacy of explicit resource allocation was reported to be providing ongoing benefit for the organization. Conclusion: While past studies have taken a cross-sectional approach, this paper introduces the first longitudinal evaluation of PSRA in a healthcare organization. By including the strengths, weaknesses, and evolution of one organization’s journey, the authors’ intend that this paper will assist other healthcare leaders in meeting the challenges of allocating scarce resources. PMID:29626400

Positioning of Emotional Intelligence Skills within the Overall Skillset of Practice-Based Accountants: Employer and Graduate Requirements

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Coady, Peggy; Byrne, Seán; Casey, John

2018-01-01

This paper presents evidence of employer and graduate attitudes on the skill set requirements for professional accountants, and whether university accounting programs develop these skills, and in particular emotional intelligence (EI) skills. We use priority indices and strategic mapping to evaluate the positioning of 31 skills. This analysis…

40 CFR 300.317 - National response priorities.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... from additional discharges. (e) The priorities set forth in this section are broad in nature, and... 40 Protection of Environment 27 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false National response priorities. 300.317... PLAN Operational Response Phases for Oil Removal § 300.317 National response priorities. (a) Safety of...

44 CFR 209.7 - Priorities for project selection.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... appropriate means may identify buyout and elevation projects. (b) States will set priorities in their State... 44 Emergency Management and Assistance 1 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Priorities for project... ASSISTANCE § 209.7 Priorities for project selection. (a) It is the State's responsibility to identify and...

Quality measures for nurse practitioner practice evaluation.

PubMed

Kleinpell, Ruth; Kapu, April N

2017-08-01

Evaluating the impact of nurse practitioner (NP) practice has become a priority area of focus for demonstrating outcomes. A number of quality measures are available to enable practice-specific evaluation of NP roles and initiatives. This article reviews sources of quality measures that can be used to facilitate quantifying the outcomes of NP practice as part of an overall evaluation agenda. National resources and published literature on NP quality measures were reviewed. Various resources and toolkits exist to assist NPs in identifying outcomes of practice using quality measures. The need to demonstrate outcomes of NP practice remains an ongoing priority area regardless of the clinical practice setting. A variety of sources of quality measures exist that can be used to showcase the effect of NP care. The use of quality measures can be effectively integrated into evaluation of NP role and NP-directed initiatives to demonstrate impact, and enhance the conduct of an NP outcomes assessment. The use of organizational, NP-specific, and national-related quality measures can help to showcase how NP care improves the quality, safety, and costs of health care. ©2017 American Association of Nurse Practitioners.

[Classification of Priority Area for Soil Environmental Protection Around Water Sources: Method Proposed and Case Demonstration].

PubMed

Li, Lei; Wang, Tie-yu; Wang, Xiaojun; Xiao, Rong-bo; Li, Qi-feng; Peng, Chi; Han, Cun-liang

2016-04-15

Based on comprehensive consideration of soil environmental quality, pollution status of river, environmental vulnerability and the stress of pollution sources, a technical method was established for classification of priority area of soil environmental protection around the river-style water sources. Shunde channel as an important drinking water sources of Foshan City, Guangdong province, was studied as a case, of which the classification evaluation system was set up. In detail, several evaluation factors were selected according to the local conditions of nature, society and economy, including the pollution degree of heavy metals in soil and sediment, soil characteristics, groundwater sensitivity, vegetation coverage, the type and location of pollution sources. Data information was mainly obtained by means of field survey, sampling analysis, and remote sensing interpretation. Afterwards, Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) was adopted to decide the weight of each factor. The basic spatial data layers were set up respectively and overlaid based on the weighted summation assessment model in Geographical Information System (GIS), resulting in a classification map of soil environmental protection level in priority area of Shunde channel. Accordingly, the area was classified to three levels named as polluted zone, risky zone and safe zone, which respectively accounted for 6.37%, 60.90% and 32.73% of the whole study area. Polluted zone and risky zone were mainly distributed in Lecong, Longjiang and Leliu towns, with pollutants mainly resulted from the long-term development of aquaculture and the industries containing furniture, plastic constructional materials and textile and clothing. In accordance with the main pollution sources of soil, targeted and differentiated strategies were put forward. The newly established evaluation method could be referenced for the protection and sustainable utilization of soil environment around the water sources.

Theories of justice and their implications for priority setting in health care.

PubMed

Olsen, J A

1997-12-01

The paper aims to show how three theories of distributive justice; utilitarianism, egalitarianism and maximum, can provide a clearer understanding of the normative basis of different priority setting regimes in the health service. The paper starts with a brief presentation of the theories, followed by their prescriptions for distribution, as illustrated with their respective preferred points on a utility possibility frontier. After this general discussion, attention is shifted from utils to health. The paper discusses how the recent Norwegian guidelines for priority setting can be understood in the light of the theories.

Community views and public health priority setting: how do health department priorities, community views, and health indicator data compare?

PubMed

Earle-Richardson, Giulia; Scribani, Melissa; Wyckoff, Lynae; Strogatz, David; May, John; Jenkins, Paul

2015-01-01

New York, like many other states, provides county-level health statistics for use in local priority settings but does not provide any data on public views about priority health issues. This study assessed whether health department priorities are notably different from community concerns about health, and how both groups' priorities compare with local health statistics. Data from a 2009 rural survey on community health concerns were compared to priorities named by the seven area county health departments, and to local health indicator data. Health care/insurance cost (60%), obesity (53%), and prescription cost (41%) were leading community concerns, regardless of age, education, sex, or Internet in the home. Six of seven county health departments selected access to quality health care (which includes health care/insurance cost) as a leading public health priority, but only three identified obesity. The following leading local health issues were suggested by health indicators: Physical activity and nutrition, Smoking, and Unintentional injury. Health departments diverged from community priorities, from health indicator data, and from one another in choosing priorities. Adding a question about community health priorities to existing state telephone surveys on health behavior and lifestyle would provide an important tool to local health departments. © 2014 Society for Public Health Education.

Social values and health priority setting in Australia: an analysis applied to the context of health technology assessment.

PubMed

Whitty, Jennifer A; Littlejohns, Peter

2015-02-01

To describe the role of social values in priority setting related to health technology assessment processes and decision-making in Australia. The processes and decision criteria of the Pharmaceutical and Medical Benefits Advisory Committees are described based on literature and policy sources, and analysed using a framework for identifying social values in priority-setting. Transparency and accountability of processes are apparent. Participation balances inclusiveness and effectiveness of decision-making, but presents an opportunity to enhance priority setting processes. Clinical and cost-effectiveness are important content considerations. Social values related to justice/equity are considered, without quantification of criteria weights for equity relative to other factors. HTA processes support solidarity through subsidising approved technologies for all Australians, whilst retaining autonomy by permitting non-subsidised technologies to be accessed privately, leading to possible tension between the values of solidarity, autonomy and equity. Priority setting related to health technology subsidy incorporates a range of inter-related social values in the processes and content of decision-making. Participation in decision-making could arguably be improved if a patient and public engagement policy were to be formulated alongside more widespread changes across processes to assess social values using approaches such as the Citizens' Jury. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Implementing accountability for reasonableness--the case of pharmaceutical reimbursement in Sweden.

PubMed

Jansson, Sandra

2007-04-01

This paper aims to describe the priority-setting procedure for new original pharmaceuticals practiced by the Swedish Pharmaceutical Benefits Board (LFN), to analyse the outcome of the procedure in terms of decisions and the relative importance of ethical principles, and to examine the reactions of stakeholders. All the 'principally important' decisions made by the LFN during its first 33 months of operation were analysed. The study is theoretically anchored in the theory of fair and legitimate priority-setting procedures by Daniels and Sabin, and is based on public documents, media articles, and semi-structured interviews. Only nine cases resulted in a rejection of a subsidy by the LFN and 15 in a limited or conditional subsidy. Total rejections rather than limitations gave rise to actions by stakeholders. Primarily, the principle of cost-effectiveness was used when limiting/conditioning or totally rejecting a subsidy. This study suggests that implementing a priority-setting process that fulfils the conditions of accountability for reasonableness can result in a priority-setting process which is generally perceived as fair and legitimate by the major stakeholders and may increase social learning in terms of accepting the necessity of priority setting in health care. The principle of cost-effectiveness increased in importance when the demand for openness and transparency increased.

Stakeholders’ participation in planning and priority setting in the context of a decentralised health care system: the case of prevention of mother to child transmission of HIV programme in Tanzania

PubMed Central

2013-01-01

Background In Tanzania, decentralisation processes and reforms in the health sector aimed at improving planning and accountability in the sector. As a result, districts were given authority to undertake local planning and set priorities as well as allocate resources fairly to promote the health of a population with varied needs. Nevertheless, priority setting in the health care service has remained a challenge. The study assessed the priority setting processes in the planning of the prevention of mother to child transmission of HIV (PMTCT) programme at the district level in Tanzania. Methods This qualitative study was conducted in Mbarali district, south-western Tanzania. The study applied in-depth interviews and focus group discussions in the data collection. Informants included members of the Council Health Management Team, regional PMTCT managers and health facility providers. Results Two plans were reported where PMTCT activities could be accommodated; the Comprehensive Council Health Plan and the Regional PMTCT Plan that was donor funded. As donors had their own globally defined priorities, it proved difficult for district and regional managers to accommodate locally defined PMTCT priorities in these plans. As a result few of these were funded. Guidelines and main priority areas of the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MoHSW) also impacted on the ability of the districts and regions to act, undermining the effectiveness of the decentralisation policy in the health sector. Conclusion The challenges in the priority setting processes revealed within the PMTCT initiative indicate substantial weaknesses in implementing the Tanzania decentralisation policy. There is an urgent need to revive the strategies and aims of the decentralisation policy at all levels of the health care system with a view to improving health service delivery. PMID:23849730

Involving healthcare professionals and family carers in setting research priorities for end-of-life care.

PubMed

Diffin, Janet; Spence, Michael; Spencer, Rebecca; Mellor, Peter; Grande, Gunn

2017-02-02

It is important to ensure regional variances are considered when setting future end-of-life research priorities, given the differing demographics and service provision. This project sought to identify end-of-life research priorities within Greater Manchester (United Kingdom). Following an initial scoping exercise, six topics within the 10 national priorities outlined by The Palliative and end-of-life care Priority Setting Partnership were selected for exploration. A workshop involving 32 healthcare professionals and a consultation process with 26 family carers was conducted. Healthcare professionals and carers selected and discussed the topics important to them. The topics selected most frequently by both healthcare professionals and carers were 'Access to 24 hour care', 'Planning end-of-life care in advance' and 'Staff and carer education'. Healthcare professionals also developed research questions for their topics of choice which were refined to incorporate carers' views. These questions are an important starting point for future end-of-life research within Greater Manchester.

The National Occupational Research Agenda: a model of broad stakeholder input into priority setting.

PubMed Central

Rosenstock, L; Olenec, C; Wagner, G R

1998-01-01

OBJECTIVES: No single organization has the resources necessary to conduct occupational safety and health research to adequately serve the needs of workers in the United States. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) undertook the task of setting research priorities in response to a broadly perceived need to systematically address those topics most pressing and most likely to yield gains to workers and to the nation. METHODS: NIOSH and its public and private partners used a consensus-building process to set priorities for the next decade for occupational safety and health research--the National Occupational Research Agenda. RESULTS: The process resulted in the identification of 21 research priorities grouped into 3 categories: disease and injury, work environment and workforce, and research tools and approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Although the field of occupational safety and health is often contentious and adversarial, these research priorities reflect a remarkable degree of concurrence among a broad range of stakeholders who provided input into a clearly defined and open process. PMID:9518963

Involving patients in setting priorities for healthcare improvement: a cluster randomized trial.

PubMed

Boivin, Antoine; Lehoux, Pascale; Lacombe, Réal; Burgers, Jako; Grol, Richard

2014-02-20

Patients are increasingly seen as active partners in healthcare. While patient involvement in individual clinical decisions has been extensively studied, no trial has assessed how patients can effectively be involved in collective healthcare decisions affecting the population. The goal of this study was to test the impact of involving patients in setting healthcare improvement priorities for chronic care at the community level. Cluster randomized controlled trial. Local communities were randomized in intervention (priority setting with patient involvement) and control sites (no patient involvement). Communities in a canadian region were required to set priorities for improving chronic disease management in primary care, from a list of 37 validated quality indicators. Patients were consulted in writing, before participating in face-to-face deliberation with professionals. Professionals established priorities among themselves, without patient involvement. A total of 172 individuals from six communities participated in the study, including 83 chronic disease patients, and 89 health professionals. The primary outcome was the level of agreement between patients' and professionals' priorities. Secondary outcomes included professionals' intention to use the selected quality indicators, and the costs of patient involvement. Priorities established with patients were more aligned with core generic components of the Medical Home and Chronic Care Model, including: access to primary care, self-care support, patient participation in clinical decisions, and partnership with community organizations (p < 0.01). Priorities established by professionals alone placed more emphasis on the technical quality of single disease management. The involvement intervention fostered mutual influence between patients and professionals, which resulted in a 41% increase in agreement on common priorities (95%CI: +12% to +58%, p < 0.01). Professionals' intention to use the selected quality indicators was similar in intervention and control sites. Patient involvement increased the costs of the prioritization process by 17%, and required 10% more time to reach consensus on common priorities. Patient involvement can change priorities driving healthcare improvement at the population level. Future research should test the generalizability of these findings to other contexts, and assess its impact on patient care. The Netherlands National Trial Register #NTR2496.

Public engagement in setting healthcare priorities: a ranking exercise in Cyprus.

PubMed

Farmakas, Antonis; Theodorou, Mamas; Galanis, Petros; Karayiannis, Georgios; Ghobrial, Stefanos; Polyzos, Nikos; Papastavrou, Evridiki; Agapidaki, Eirini; Souliotis, Kyriakos

2017-01-01

In countries such as Cyprus the financial crisis and the recession have severely affected the funding and priority setting of the health care system. There is evidence highlighting the importance of population' preferences in designing priorities for health care settings. Although public preferences have been thorough analysed in many countries, there is a research gap in terms of simultaneously investigating the relative importance and the weight of differing and competing criteria for determining healthcare priority settings. The main objective of the study was tο investigate public preferences for the relative utility and weight of differing and competing criteria for health care priority setting in Cyprus. The 'conjoint analysis' technique was applied to develop a ranking exercise. The aim of the study was to identify the preferences of the participants for alternative options. Participants were asked to grade in a priority order 16 hypothetical case scenarios of patients with different disease and of diverse socio-economic characteristics awaiting treatment. The sample was purposive and consisted of 100 Cypriots, selected from public locations all over the country. It was revealed that the "severity of the disease" and the " age of the patient" were the key prioritization criteria. Participants assigned the smallest relative value to the criterion " healthy lifestyle" . More precisely, participants older than 35 years old assigned higher relative importance to " age" , while younger participants to the " severity of the disease". The " healthy lifestyle" criterion was assigned to the lowest relative importance to by all participants. In Cyprus, public participation in health care priority setting is almost inexistent. Nonetheless, it seems that the public's participation in this process could lead to a wider acceptance of the healthcare system especially as a result of the financial crisis and the upcoming reforms implemented such as the establishment of the General System of Health Insurance.

Thinking Beyond the Silos: Emerging Priorities in Workforce Development for State and Local Government Public Health Agencies

PubMed Central

Kaufman, Nancy J.; Castrucci, Brian C.; Pearsol, Jim; Leider, Jonathon P.; Sellers, Katie; Kaufman, Ira R.; Fehrenbach, Lacy M.; Liss-Levinson, Rivka; Lewis, Melissa; Jarris, Paul E.; Sprague, James B.

2014-01-01

Context: Discipline-specific workforce development initiatives have been a focus in recent years. This is due, in part, to competency-based training standards and funding sources that reinforce programmatic silos within state and local health departments. Objective: National leadership groups representing the specific disciplines within public health were asked to look beyond their discipline-specific priorities and collectively assess the priorities, needs, and characteristics of the governmental public health workforce. Design: The challenges and opportunities facing the public health workforce and crosscutting priority training needs of the public health workforce as a whole were evaluated. Key informant interviews were conducted with 31 representatives from public health member organizations and federal agencies. Interviews were coded and analyzed for major themes. Next, 10 content briefs were created on the basis of priority areas within workforce development. Finally, an in-person priority setting meeting was held to identify top workforce development needs and priorities across all disciplines within public health. Participants: Representatives from 31 of 37 invited public health organizations participated, including representatives from discipline-specific member organizations, from national organizations and from federal agencies. Results: Systems thinking, communicating persuasively, change management, information and analytics, problem solving, and working with diverse populations were the major crosscutting areas prioritized. Conclusions: Decades of categorical funding created a highly specialized and knowledgeable workforce that lacks many of the foundational skills now most in demand. The balance between core and specialty training should be reconsidered. PMID:24667228

Thinking beyond the silos: emerging priorities in workforce development for state and local government public health agencies.

PubMed

Kaufman, Nancy J; Castrucci, Brian C; Pearsol, Jim; Leider, Jonathon P; Sellers, Katie; Kaufman, Ira R; Fehrenbach, Lacy M; Liss-Levinson, Rivka; Lewis, Melissa; Jarris, Paul E; Sprague, James B

2014-01-01

Discipline-specific workforce development initiatives have been a focus in recent years. This is due, in part, to competency-based training standards and funding sources that reinforce programmatic silos within state and local health departments. National leadership groups representing the specific disciplines within public health were asked to look beyond their discipline-specific priorities and collectively assess the priorities, needs, and characteristics of the governmental public health workforce. The challenges and opportunities facing the public health workforce and crosscutting priority training needs of the public health workforce as a whole were evaluated. Key informant interviews were conducted with 31 representatives from public health member organizations and federal agencies. Interviews were coded and analyzed for major themes. Next, 10 content briefs were created on the basis of priority areas within workforce development. Finally, an in-person priority setting meeting was held to identify top workforce development needs and priorities across all disciplines within public health. Representatives from 31 of 37 invited public health organizations participated, including representatives from discipline-specific member organizations, from national organizations and from federal agencies. Systems thinking, communicating persuasively, change management, information and analytics, problem solving, and working with diverse populations were the major crosscutting areas prioritized. Decades of categorical funding created a highly specialized and knowledgeable workforce that lacks many of the foundational skills now most in demand. The balance between core and specialty training should be reconsidered.

12 CFR 269b.220 - Priority; acceleration of proceedings.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... the setting aside of an election or the conduct of a new election shall be given priority. (b) The... 12 Banks and Banking 3 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Priority; acceleration of proceedings. 269b.220... RESERVE SYSTEM CHARGES OF UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES Preliminary Investigation § 269b.220 Priority...

46 CFR 295.12 - Priority for awarding agreements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... to all vessels within a priority set forth herein, MARAD shall award to each eligible applicant in... 46 Shipping 8 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Priority for awarding agreements. 295.12 Section 295.12... OPERATORS MARITIME SECURITY PROGRAM (MSP) Establishment of MSP Fleet and Eligibility § 295.12 Priority for...

49 CFR 19.11 - Pre-award policies.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... benefit or use of the Federal Government. (b) Public notice and priority setting. Federal awarding agencies shall notify the public of its intended funding priorities for discretionary grant programs, unless funding priorities are established by Federal statute. ...

22 CFR 518.11 - Pre-award policies.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... benefit or use of the Federal Government. (b) Public Notice and Priority Setting. Federal awarding agencies shall notify the public of its intended funding priorities for discretionary grant programs, unless funding priorities are established by Federal statute. ...

How Schools Can Promote Healthy Development for Newly Arrived Immigrant and Refugee Adolescents: Research Priorities.

PubMed

McNeely, Clea A; Morland, Lyn; Doty, S Benjamin; Meschke, Laurie L; Awad, Summer; Husain, Altaf; Nashwan, Ayat

2017-02-01

The US education system must find creative and effective ways to foster the healthy development of the approximately 2 million newly arrived immigrant and refugee adolescents, many of whom contend with language barriers, limited prior education, trauma, and discrimination. We identify research priorities for promoting the school success of these youth. The study used the 4-phase priority-setting method of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative. In the final stage, 132 researchers, service providers, educators, and policymakers based in the United States were asked to rate the importance of 36 research options. The highest priority research options (range 1 to 5) were: evaluating newcomer programs (mean = 4.44, SD = 0.55), identifying how family and community stressors affect newly arrived immigrant and refugee adolescents' functioning in school (mean = 4.40, SD = 0.56), identifying teachers' major stressors in working with this population (mean = 4.36, SD = 0.72), and identifying how to engage immigrant and refugee families in their children's education (mean = 4.35, SD = 0.62). These research priorities emphasize the generation of practical knowledge that could translate to immediate, tangible benefits for schools. Funders, schools, and researchers can use these research priorities to guide research for the highest benefit of schools and the newly arrived immigrant and refugee adolescents they serve. © 2017, American School Health Association.

[Priority setting of health interventions. Review of criteria, approaches and role of assessment agencies].

PubMed

Varela-Lema, Leonor; Atienza-Merino, Gerardo; López-García, Marisa

This study was carried out to develop an explicit health priority setting methodology to support decision-making regarding the technologies to be assessed for inclusion in the National Health Service service portfolio. The primary objective is to identify and analyse the criteria, approaches and conceptual frameworks used for national/international priority setting. An exhaustive review of the literature was carried out. For this purpose, a search of the main biomedical databases was performed and assessment agency websites were reviewed, among other sources. In general terms, it was found that there are no standardised criteria for priority setting, although some consensus and common trends have been identified regarding key elements (criteria, models and strategies, key actors, etc.). Globally, 8 key domains were identified: 1) need for intervention; 2) health outcomes; 3) type of benefit of the intervention; 4) economic consequences; 5) existing knowledge on the intervention/quality of and uncertainties regarding the evidence; 6) implementation and complexity of the intervention/feasibility; 7) priority, justice and ethics; and 8) overall context. The review provides a thorough analysis of the relevant issues and offers key recommendations regarding considerations for developing a national prioritisation framework. Findings are envisioned to be useful for different public organisations that are aiming to establish healthcare priorities. Copyright © 2016 SESPAS. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

An Emergency Medicine Research Priority Setting Partnership to establish the top 10 research priorities in emergency medicine.

PubMed

Smith, Jason; Keating, Liza; Flowerdew, Lynsey; O'Brien, Rachel; McIntyre, Sam; Morley, Richard; Carley, Simon

2017-07-01

Defining research priorities in a specialty as broad as emergency medicine is a significant challenge. In order to fund and complete the most important research projects, it is imperative that we identify topics that are important to all clinicians, society and to our patients. We have undertaken a priority setting partnership to establish the most important questions facing emergency medicine. The top 10 questions reached through a consensus process are discussed. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

77 FR 28467 - Identifying and Reducing Regulatory Burdens

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-05-14

... online wherever practicable. Sec. 3. Setting Priorities. In implementing and improving their... regulatory priorities, to promote public participation in retrospective review, to modernize our regulatory..., agencies shall give priority, consistent with law, to those initiatives that will produce significant...

29 CFR 1990.133 - Publication.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

...) IDENTIFICATION, CLASSIFICATION, AND REGULATION OF POTENTIAL OCCUPATIONAL CARCINOGENS Priority Setting § 1990.133...) The Secretary shall publish the Priority Lists in the Federal Register at least every six months and... notice requesting information concerning the classification and establishment of priorities for...

Promoting the Implementation of an Evidence-Based Intervention for Adolescent Marijuana Abuse in Community Settings: Testing the Use of Intensive Quality Assurance

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Henggeler, Scott W.; Sheidow, Ashli J.; Cunningham, Phillippe B.; Donohue, Bradley C.; Ford, Julian D.

2008-01-01

The development and evaluation of effective strategies for transporting evidence-based practices to community-based clinicians has become a research and policy priority. Using multisystemic therapy programs as a platform, an experimental design examined the capacity of an Intensive Quality Assurance (IQA) system to promote therapist implementation…

Priorities for research in miscarriage: a priority setting partnership between people affected by miscarriage and professionals following the James Lind Alliance methodology

PubMed Central

Bagness, Carmel; Brewin, Jane; Coomarasamy, Arri; Easthope, Lucy; Hepworth-Jones, Barbara; Hinshaw, Kim; O'Toole, Emily; Orford, Julie; Regan, Lesley; Raine-Fenning, Nick; Shakespeare, Judy; Small, Rachel; Thornton, Jim; Metcalf, Leanne

2017-01-01

Objectives To identify and prioritise important research questions for miscarriage. Design A priority setting partnership using prospective surveys and consensus meetings following methods advocated by the James Lind Alliance. Setting UK. Participants Women and those affected by miscarriage working alongside healthcare professionals. Results In the initial survey, 1093 participants (932 women who have experienced miscarriage, 8 partners, 17 family members, friends or colleagues, 104 healthcare professionals and eight charitable organisations) submitted 3279 questions. A review of existing literature identified a further 64. Non-questions were removed, and the remaining questions were categorised and summarised into 58 questions. In an interim electronic survey, 2122 respondents chose their top 10 priorities from the 58 summary questions. The 25 highest ranked in the survey were prioritised at a final face-to-face workshop. In summary, the top 10 priorities were ranked as follows: research into preventative treatment, emotional aspects in general, investigation, relevance of pre-existing medical conditions, emotional support as a treatment, importance of lifestyle factors, importance of genetic and chromosomal causes, preconception tests, investigation after different numbers of miscarriage and male causal factors. Conclusions These results should be the focus of future miscarriage research. Presently, studies are being conducted to address the top priority; however, many other priorities, especially psychological and emotional support, are less well researched areas. We hope our results will encourage both researchers and funders to focus on these priorities. PMID:28838896

14 CFR 250.3 - Boarding priority rules.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 4 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Boarding priority rules. 250.3 Section 250...) ECONOMIC REGULATIONS OVERSALES § 250.3 Boarding priority rules. (a) Every carrier shall establish priority... rules and criteria shall reflect the obligations of the carrier set forth in §§ 250.2a and 250.2b to...

42 CFR 56.107 - Priorities for grants.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... of this part will be made in accordance with priorities set forth in paragraphs (a)(2) through (a)(6... 42 Public Health 1 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Priorities for grants. 56.107 Section 56.107 Public... SERVICES General Provisions § 56.107 Priorities for grants. (a) Grants under sections 319(c) (1)(A), 319(d...

37 CFR 1.55 - Claim for foreign priority.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... accompanied by the processing fee set forth in § 1.17(i), but the patent will not include the priority claim... 37 Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights 1 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Claim for foreign priority. 1... Application § 1.55 Claim for foreign priority. (a) An applicant in a nonprovisional application may claim the...

40 CFR 35.1620-5 - State work programs and lake priority lists.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... lakes according to trophic condition (§ 35.1630) and to set priorities for implementing clean lakes... 40 Protection of Environment 1 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false State work programs and lake priority... Publicly Owned Freshwater Lakes § 35.1620-5 State work programs and lake priority lists. (a)(1) A State...

Combining evidence and values in priority setting: testing the balance sheet method in a low-income country.

PubMed

Makundi, Emmanuel; Kapiriri, Lydia; Norheim, Ole Frithjof

2007-09-24

Procedures for priority setting need to incorporate both scientific evidence and public values. The aim of this study was to test out a model for priority setting which incorporates both scientific evidence and public values, and to explore use of evidence by a selection of stakeholders and to study reasons for the relative ranking of health care interventions in a setting of extreme resource scarcity. Systematic search for and assessment of relevant evidence for priority setting in a low-income country. Development of a balance sheet according to Eddy's explicit method. Eight group interviews (n-85), using a modified nominal group technique for eliciting individual and group rankings of a given set of health interventions. The study procedure made it possible to compare the groups' ranking before and after all the evidence was provided to participants. A rank deviation is significant if the rank order of the same intervention differed by two or more points on the ordinal scale. A comparison between the initial rank and the final rank (before deliberation) showed a rank deviation of 67%. The difference between the initial rank and the final rank after discussion and voting gave a rank deviation of 78%. Evidence-based and deliberative decision-making does change priorities significantly in an experimental setting. Our use of the balance sheet method was meant as a demonstration project, but could if properly developed be feasible for health planners, experts and health workers, although more work is needed before it can be used for laypersons.

Cancer research priorities and gaps in Iran: the influence of cancer burden on cancer research outputs between 1997 and 2014.

PubMed

Majidi, A; Salimzadeh, H; Beiki, O; Delavari, F; Majidi, S; Delavari, A; Malekzadeh, R

2017-03-01

As a developing country, Iran is experiencing the increasing burden of cancers, which are currently the third leading cause of mortality in Iran. This study aims to demonstrate that cancer research in Iran concentrates on the cancer research priorities based on the global burden of disease (GBD) reports. Descriptive evaluation of all cancers disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) was performed using GBD data. Also a comprehensive search was conducted using cancer-associated keywords to obtain all cancer-related publications from Iran, indexed in Web of Science. Multiple regression analysis and correlation coefficients (R 2 ) were used to evaluate the possible associations between cancer research publications and GBD. During 1996-2014, the majority of cancer-related publications in Iran focused on breast cancer, leukaemia and stomach cancer, respectively. This study found hypothetical correlations between cancer publications in Iran in line with the burden of cancer as reported by GBD. Particularly, correlations between years lived with disability (YLD) and cancer-related publications were more obvious. This study introduces a new outline in setting cancer research priorities in the region. Copyright © 2016 The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

An importance-performance analysis of hospital information system attributes: A nurses' perspective.

PubMed

Cohen, Jason F; Coleman, Emma; Kangethe, Matheri J

2016-02-01

Health workers have numerous concerns about hospital IS (HIS) usage. Addressing these concerns requires understanding the system attributes most important to their satisfaction and productivity. Following a recent HIS implementation, our objective was to identify priorities for managerial intervention based on user evaluations of the performance of the HIS attributes as well as the relative importance of these attributes to user satisfaction and productivity outcomes. We collected data along a set of attributes representing system quality, data quality, information quality, and service quality from 154 nurse users. Their quantitative responses were analysed using the partial least squares approach followed by an importance-performance analysis. Qualitative responses were analysed using thematic analysis to triangulate and supplement the quantitative findings. Two system quality attributes (responsiveness and ease of learning), one information quality attribute (detail), one service quality attribute (sufficient support), and three data quality attributes (records complete, accurate and never missing) were identified as high priorities for intervention. Our application of importance-performance analysis is unique in HIS evaluation and we have illustrated its utility for identifying those system attributes for which underperformance is not acceptable to users and therefore should be high priorities for intervention. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

The Evaluation of Federal Programs in Agricultural Research, Education, and Extension. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Resource Conservation, Research, and Forestry of the Committee on Agriculture. House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourth Congress, Second Session (March 27, May 14, July 17, 1996).

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Congress of the U.S., Washington, DC. House Committee on Agriculture.

Three House of Representatives' subcommittee hearings were held in March, May, and July 1996 to evaluate the goals, priority setting, and advisory mechanisms of federal programs in agricultural research, education, and extension. To become competitive in global markets, farmers will need to rely on the research community to provide up-to-date…

Manufacturing in America: Crisis and Opportunity

DTIC Science & Technology

1993-04-01

Management November-December 1991: 39-45. 13 Chubb, John E. and Eric A. Hanushek . Setting National Priorities: Policy for the Nineties. Ed. Henry J. Aaron...A. Hanushek . Setting National Priorities: Policy for the Nineties. Ed. Henry J. Aaron. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution,1990. 16 ’Training

75 FR 77642 - Priority Setting for the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (CHIPRA...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-12-13

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Priority Setting for the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (CHIPRA) Pediatric Quality Measures Program--Notice of Correction On pages 75469 and 75470, Volume 75, Number 232, Federal Register...

Using Multiattribute Utility Theory as a Priority-Setting Tool in Human Services Planning.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Camasso, Michael J.; Dick, Janet

1993-01-01

The feasibility of applying multiattribute utility theory to the needs assessment and priority-setting activities of human services planning councils was studied in Essex County (New Jersey). Decision-making and information filtering processes are explored in the context of community planning. (SLD)

Setting Priorities Among Educational Objectives.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Sutjipto, Sudijarto; And Others

This publication is intended to aid educational planners in developing nations in translating national goals and aspirations into educational objectives and in establishing and quantifying priorities among educational objectives. Much of the content is based on a model for setting educational objectives that was developed in Indonesia in 1972. The…

Communitarian claims and community capabilities: furthering priority setting?

PubMed

Mooney, Gavin

2005-01-01

Priority setting in health care is generally not done well. This paper draws on ideas from Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum and adds some communitarian underpinnings to provide a way of improving on current uses of program budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA) in priority setting. The paper suggests that shifting to a communitarian base for priority setting alters the distribution of property rights over health service decision making and increases the probability that recommendations from PBMA exercises will be implemented. The approach is built on a paradigm which departs from three tenets of welfarism as it is normally conceived: (i) individuals qua individuals seek to maximise their individual utility/well-being; (ii) individuals want to do this; and (iii) it is the values of individuals qua individuals that count. Some of the problems of PBMA, as it has been applied to date, are highlighted. It is argued that these are due largely to a lack of 'credible commitment'. Bringing in the community and communitarian values to PBMA priority setting exercises can help to overcome some of the barriers to getting PBMA recommendations implemented. The approach has the merit of reflecting Sen's concept of capabilities (but extending that to a community level). It avoids the often consequentialist base of a conventional welfarist framework, and it allows community values as opposed to individual values to come to the fore. How to elicit communitarian values is explored.

Priority setting of ICU resources in an influenza pandemic: a qualitative study of the Canadian public's perspectives.

PubMed

Silva, Diego S; Gibson, Jennifer L; Robertson, Ann; Bensimon, Cécile M; Sahni, Sachin; Maunula, Laena; Smith, Maxwell J

2012-03-26

Pandemic influenza may exacerbate existing scarcity of life-saving medical resources. As a result, decision-makers may be faced with making tough choices about who will receive care and who will have to wait or go without. Although previous studies have explored ethical issues in priority setting from the perspective of clinicians and policymakers, there has been little investigation into how the public views priority setting during a pandemic influenza, in particular related to intensive care resources. To bridge this gap, we conducted three public town hall meetings across Canada to explore Canadian's perspectives on this ethical challenge. Town hall discussions group discussions were digitally recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Six interrelated themes emerged from the town hall discussions related to: ethical and empirical starting points for deliberation; criteria for setting priorities; pre-crisis planning; in-crisis decision-making; the need for public deliberation and input; and participants' deliberative struggle with the ethical issues. Our findings underscore the importance of public consultation in pandemic planning for sustaining public trust in a public health emergency. Participants appreciated the empirical and ethical uncertainty of decision-making in an influenza pandemic and demonstrated nuanced ethical reasoning about priority setting of intensive care resources in an influenza pandemic. Policymakers may benefit from a better understanding the public's empirical and ethical 'starting points' in developing effective pandemic plans.

Setting Priorities in Global Child Health Research Investments: Guidelines for Implementation of the CHNRI Method

PubMed Central

Rudan, Igor; Gibson, Jennifer L.; Ameratunga, Shanthi; El Arifeen, Shams; Bhutta, Zulfiqar A.; Black, Maureen; Black, Robert E.; Brown, Kenneth H.; Campbell, Harry; Carneiro, Ilona; Chan, Kit Yee; Chandramohan, Daniel; Chopra, Mickey; Cousens, Simon; Darmstadt, Gary L.; Gardner, Julie Meeks; Hess, Sonja Y.; Hyder, Adnan A.; Kapiriri, Lydia; Kosek, Margaret; Lanata, Claudio F.; Lansang, Mary Ann; Lawn, Joy; Tomlinson, Mark; Tsai, Alexander C.; Webster, Jayne

2008-01-01

This article provides detailed guidelines for the implementation of systematic method for setting priorities in health research investments that was recently developed by Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI). The target audience for the proposed method are international agencies, large research funding donors, and national governments and policy-makers. The process has the following steps: (i) selecting the managers of the process; (ii) specifying the context and risk management preferences; (iii) discussing criteria for setting health research priorities; (iv) choosing a limited set of the most useful and important criteria; (v) developing means to assess the likelihood that proposed health research options will satisfy the selected criteria; (vi) systematic listing of a large number of proposed health research options; (vii) pre-scoring check of all competing health research options; (viii) scoring of health research options using the chosen set of criteria; (ix) calculating intermediate scores for each health research option; (x) obtaining further input from the stakeholders; (xi) adjusting intermediate scores taking into account the values of stakeholders; (xii) calculating overall priority scores and assigning ranks; (xiii) performing an analysis of agreement between the scorers; (xiv) linking computed research priority scores with investment decisions; (xv) feedback and revision. The CHNRI method is a flexible process that enables prioritizing health research investments at any level: institutional, regional, national, international, or global. PMID:19090596

A spatial decision support system (SDSS) for sustainable tourism planning in Cameron Highlands, Malaysia

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Aminu, M.; Matori, A. N.; Yusof, K. W.

2014-02-01

The study describes a methodological approach based on an integrated use of Geographic Information System (GIS) and Analytic Network Process (ANP) of Multi Criteria Evaluation (MCE) to determine nature conservation and tourism development priorities among the highland areas. A set of criteria and indicators were defined to evaluate the highlands biodiversity conservation and tourism development. Pair wise comparison technique was used in order to support solution of a decision problem by evaluating possible alternatives from different perspectives. After the weights have been derived from the pairwise comparison technique, the next step was to compute the unweighted supermatrix, weighted supermatrix and the limit matrix. The limit matrix was normalized to obtain the priorities and the results transferred into GIS environment. Elements evaluated and ranked were represented by criterion maps. Map layers reflecting the opinion of different experts involved were summed using the weighted overlay approach of GIS. Subsequently sustainable tourism development scenarios were generated. The generation of scenarios highlighted the critical issues of the decision problem because it allows one to gradually narrow down a problem.

Therapy interventions for children with neurodisabilities: a qualitative scoping study.

PubMed

Beresford, Bryony; Clarke, Susan; Maddison, Jane

2018-01-01

Therapy interventions emerged four times in the top 10 research priorities in a James Lind Alliance research prioritisation exercise for children with neurodisabilities (Morris C, Simkiss D, Busk M, Morris M, Allard A, Denness J, et al. Setting research priorities to improve the health of children and young people with neurodisability: a British Academy of Childhood Disability-James Lind Alliance Research Priority Setting Partnership. BMJ Open 2015; 5 :e006233). The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) commissioned this study as part of an information-gathering exercise in response to this. The objectives were to (1) describe the current practice, approaches and schools of thought in relation to physiotherapy, occupational therapy and speech and language therapy for children with neurodisability; (2) explore clinical decision-making; (3) investigate views on outcomes and their measurement, particularly participation as an outcome, that is, the child's ability to have the opportunity to be involved in life situations and activities (e.g. communication, mobility, interpersonal interactions, self-care, learning and applying knowledge); (4) seek views on the aspects of therapy interventions that have an impact on outcomes; and (5) elicit stakeholder views on research needs and priorities. More than 70 professionals (therapists, service leads, paediatricians and education staff) and 25 parents participated in a qualitative interview (either individually or as part of a focus group). Professional thinking and models of service delivery are in a state of flux and development. There is a move towards goals-focused, family-centred approaches. Work tends to be highly individualised, with few protocols. Parents are certain of the value of therapies, although they may experience difficulties with provision and may seek (additional) private provision. Therapy interventions are conceived as three components: the therapist, the procedures/equipment, etc., and the wider therapeutic environment. They are believed to be highly complex and poorly understood. Although participation is widely endorsed as a core intervention objective of therapy interventions, its suitability, or appropriateness, as an outcome measure was questioned. Other child and/or parent outcomes were identified as more or equally important. Notions of intermediate outcomes - in terms of body structure/function, and the achievement of activities - were regarded as important and not counter to participation-focused approaches. Among therapists, research on intervention effectiveness was (cautiously) welcomed. A number of methodological challenges were identified. A portfolio of study designs - quantitative and qualitative, experimental and observational - was called for, and which included economic evaluation and clear pathways to impact. The study was not successful in recruiting children and young people. Further work is required to elucidate the views of this key stakeholder group. Therapy interventions are poorly understood. There was strong support, tempered a little by concerns among some about the feasibility of demonstrating impact, for investment in research. The identification of research priorities was a core study objective, and a wide-ranging research agenda was identified. It included 'foundational' research into neurodisability, the active components of therapy interventions and the concept of participation. Three areas of evaluation were identified: overall approaches to therapy, service organisation and delivery issues, and the evaluation of specific techniques. Parents regarded evaluations of approaches to therapy (e.g. goals-focused; supporting family-self management) as priorities, along with evaluations of models of service provision. Professionals' views were broadly similar, with an additional emphasis on methodological research. In terms of specific techniques, there was no shared agreement regarding priorities, with views informed by personal interests and experiences. The NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme.

Neonatal survival in complex humanitarian emergencies: setting an evidence-based research agenda

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background Over 40% of all deaths among children under 5 are neonatal deaths (0–28 days), and this proportion is increasing. In 2012, 2.9 million newborns died, with 99% occurring in low- and middle-income countries. Many of the countries with the highest neonatal mortality rates globally are currently or have recently been affected by complex humanitarian emergencies. Despite the global burden of neonatal morbidity and mortality and risks inherent in complex emergency situations, research investments are not commensurate to burden and little is known about the epidemiology or best practices for neonatal survival in these settings. Methods We used the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology to prioritize research questions on neonatal health in complex humanitarian emergencies. Experts evaluated 35 questions using four criteria (answerability, feasibility, relevance, equity) with three subcomponents per criterion. Using SAS 9.2, a research prioritization score (RPS) and average expert agreement score (AEA) were calculated for each question. Results Twenty-eight experts evaluated all 35 questions. RPS ranged from 0.846 to 0.679 and the AEA ranged from 0.667 to 0.411. The top ten research priorities covered a range of issues but generally fell into two categories– epidemiologic and programmatic components of neonatal health. The highest ranked question in this survey was “What strategies are effective in increasing demand for, and use of skilled attendance?” Conclusions In this study, a diverse group of experts used the CHRNI methodology to systematically identify and determine research priorities for neonatal health and survival in complex humanitarian emergencies. The priorities included the need to better understand the magnitude of the disease burden and interventions to improve neonatal health in complex humanitarian emergencies. The findings from this study will provide guidance to researchers and program implementers in neonatal and complex humanitarian fields to engage on the research priorities needed to save lives most at risk. PMID:24959198

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Roger Lew; Ronald L. Boring; Thomas A. Ulrich

Operators of critical processes, such as nuclear power production, must contend with highly complex systems, procedures, and regulations. Developing human-machine interfaces (HMIs) that better support operators is a high priority for ensuring the safe and reliable operation of critical processes. Human factors engineering (HFE) provides a rich and mature set of tools for evaluating the performance of HMIs, but the set of tools for developing and designing HMIs is still in its infancy. Here we propose that Microsoft Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) is well suited for many roles in the research and development of HMIs for process control.

NASA's Office of Space Science and Applications: Process, priorities, and goals

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1992-01-01

Summarized here are the activities of a one-day workshop convened to assess the effectiveness and priority setting mechanisms used by NASA's Office of Space Science and Applications in carrying out its diverse scientific programs. Among the topics discussed were strategic planning, decision making, and goal setting.

Patients' self-interested preferences: empirical evidence from a priority setting experiment.

PubMed

Alvarez, Begoña; Rodríguez-Míguez, Eva

2011-04-01

This paper explores whether patients act according to self-interest in priority setting experiments. The analysis is based on a ranking experiment, conducted in Galicia (Spain), to elicit preferences regarding the prioritization of patients on a waiting list for an elective surgical intervention (prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia). Participants were patients awaiting a similar intervention and members of the general populations. All of them were asked to rank hypothetical patients on a waiting list. A rank-ordered logit was then applied to their responses in order to obtain a prioritization scoring system. Using these estimations, we first test for differences in preferences between patients and general population. Second, we implement a procedure based on the similarity between respondents (true patients) and the hypothetical scenarios they evaluate (hypothetical patients) to analyze whether patients provide self-interested rankings. Our results show that patient preferences differ significantly from general population preferences. The findings also indicate that, when patients rank the hypothetical scenarios on the waiting list, they consider not only the explicit attributes but also the similarity of each scenario to their own. In particular, they assign a higher priority to scenarios that more closely match their own states. We also find that such a preference structure increases their likelihood of reporting "irrational" answers. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Use of survey data to define regional and local priorities for management on national wildlife refuges

Treesearch

John R. Sauer; Jennifer Casey; Harold Laskowski; Jan D. Taylor; Jane Fallon

2005-01-01

National Wildlife Refuges must manage habitats to support a variety of species that often have conflicting needs. To make reasonable management decisions, managers must know what species are priorities for their refuges and the relative importance of the species. Unfortunately, species priorities are often set regionally, but refuges must develop local priorities that...

Setting practical conservation priorities for birds in the Western Andes of Colombia.

PubMed

Ocampo-Peñuela, Natalia; Pimm, Stuart L

2014-10-01

We aspired to set conservation priorities in ways that lead to direct conservation actions. Very large-scale strategic mapping leads to familiar conservation priorities exemplified by biodiversity hotspots. In contrast, tactical conservation actions unfold on much smaller geographical extents and they need to reflect the habitat loss and fragmentation that have sharply restricted where species now live. Our aspirations for direct, practical actions were demanding. First, we identified the global, strategic conservation priorities and then downscaled to practical local actions within the selected priorities. In doing this, we recognized the limitations of incomplete information. We started such a process in Colombia and used the results presented here to implement reforestation of degraded land to prevent the isolation of a large area of cloud forest. We used existing range maps of 171 bird species to identify priority conservation areas that would conserve the greatest number of species at risk in Colombia. By at risk species, we mean those that are endemic and have small ranges. The Western Andes had the highest concentrations of such species-100 in total-but the lowest densities of national parks. We then adjusted the priorities for this region by refining these species ranges by selecting only areas of suitable elevation and remaining habitat. The estimated ranges of these species shrank by 18-100% after accounting for habitat and suitable elevation. Setting conservation priorities on the basis of currently available range maps excluded priority areas in the Western Andes and, by extension, likely elsewhere and for other taxa. By incorporating detailed maps of remaining natural habitats, we made practical recommendations for conservation actions. One recommendation was to restore forest connections to a patch of cloud forest about to become isolated from the main Andes. © 2014 Society for Conservation Biology.

Burden of Disease Study and Priority Setting in Korea: an Ethical Perspective

PubMed Central

2016-01-01

When thinking about priority setting in access to healthcare resources, decision-making requires that cost-effectiveness is balanced against medical ethics. The burden of disease has emerged as an important approach to the assessment of health needs for political decision-making. However, the disability adjusted life years approach hides conceptual and methodological issues regarding the claims and value of disabled people. In this article, we discuss ethical issues that are raised as a consequence of the introduction of evidence-based health policy, such as economic evidence, in establishing resource allocation priorities. In terms of ethical values in health priority setting in Korea, there is no reliable rationale for the judgment used in decision-making as well as for setting separate and distinct priorities for different government bodies. An important question, therefore, is which ethical values guiding the practice of decision-making should be reconciled with the economic evidence found in Korean healthcare. The health technology assessment core model from the European network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) project is a good example of incorporating ethical values into decision-making. We suggest that a fair distribution of scarce healthcare resources in South Korea can be achieved by considering the ethical aspects of healthcare. PMID:27775247

SU-E-T-551: Monitor Unit Optimization in Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Stage I Lung Cancer

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Huang, B-T; Lu, J-Y

2015-06-15

Purpose: The study aims to reduce the monitor units (MUs) in the stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) treatment for lung cancer by adjusting the optimizing parameters. Methods: Fourteen patients suffered from stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) were enrolled. Three groups of parameters were adjusted to investigate their effects on MU numbers and organs at risk (OARs) sparing: (1) the upper objective of planning target volume (UOPTV); (2) strength setting in the MU constraining objective; (3) max MU setting in the MU constraining objective. Results: We found that the parameters in the optimizer influenced the MU numbers in amore » priority, strength and max MU dependent manner. MU numbers showed a decreasing trend with the UOPTV increasing. MU numbers with low, medium and high priority for the UOPTV were 428±54, 312±48 and 258±31 MU/Gy, respectively. High priority for UOPTV also spared the heart, cord and lung while maintaining comparable PTV coverage than the low and medium priority group. It was observed that MU numbers tended to decrease with the strength increasing and max MU setting decreasing. With maximum strength, the MU numbers reached its minimum while maintaining comparable or improved dose to the normal tissues. It was also found that the MU numbers continued to decline at 85% and 75% max MU setting but no longer to decrease at 50% and 25%. Combined with high priority for UOPTV and MU constraining objectives, the MU numbers can be decreased as low as 223±26 MU/Gy. Conclusion:: The priority of UOPTV, MU constraining objective in the optimizer impact on the MU numbers in SBRT treatment for lung cancer. Giving high priority to the UOPTV, setting the strength to maximum value and the max MU to 50% in the MU objective achieves the lowest MU numbers while maintaining comparable or improved OAR sparing.« less

Research Priorities for the Intersection of Alcohol and HIV/AIDS in Low and Middle Income Countries: A Priority Setting Exercise.

PubMed

Gordon, Sara; Rotheram-Borus, Mary Jane; Skeen, Sarah; Perry, Charles; Bryant, Kendall; Tomlinson, Mark

2017-11-01

The harmful use of alcohol is a component cause for more than 200 diseases. The association between alcohol consumption, risk taking behavior and a range of infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS is well established. The prevalence of HIV/AIDS as well as harmful alcohol use in low and middle income countries is high. Alcohol has been identified as a modifiable risk factor in the prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS. The objective of this paper is to define research priorities for the interaction of alcohol and HIV/AIDS in low and middle income countries. The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) priority setting methodology was applied in order to assess research priorities of the interaction of alcohol and HIV/AIDS. A group of 171 global and local experts in the field of alcohol and or HIV/AIDS related research were identified and invited to generate research questions. This resulted in 205 research questions which have been categorized and refined by senior researchers into 48 research questions to be evaluated using five criteria: answerability, effectiveness, feasibility, applicability and impact, as well as equity. A total of 59 experts participated independently in the voluntary scoring exercise (a 34% response rate). There was substantial consensus among experts on priorities for research on alcohol and HIV. These tended to break down into two categories, those focusing on better understanding the nexus between alcohol and HIV and those directed towards informing practical interventions to reduce the impact of alcohol use on HIV treatment outcomes, which replicates what Bryant (Subst Use Misuse 41:1465-1507, 2006) and Parry et al. (Addiction 108:1-2, 2012) found. Responses from experts were stratified by location in order to determine any differences between groups. On average experts in the LMIC gave higher scores than the HIC experts. Recent research has shown the causal link between alcohol consumption and the incidence of HIV/AIDS including a better understanding of the pathways through which alcohol use affects ARV adherence (and other medications to treat opportunistic infections) and CD4 counts. The results of this process clearly indicated that the important priorities for future research related to the development and assessment of interventions focusing on addressing alcohol and HIV/AIDS, addressing and exploring the impact of HIV risk and comorbid alcohol use, as well as exploring the risk and protective factors in the field of alcohol and HIV/AIDS. The findings from this priority setting exercise could guide international research agenda and make research funding more effective in addressing the research on intersection of alcohol and HIV/AIDS.

Selection and Evaluation of Priority Domains in Global Energy Internet Standard Development Based on Technology Foresight

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Jin, Yang; Ciwei, Gao; Jing, Zhang; Min, Sun; Jie, Yu

2017-05-01

The selection and evaluation of priority domains in Global Energy Internet standard development will help to break through limits of national investment, thus priority will be given to standardizing technical areas with highest urgency and feasibility. Therefore, in this paper, the process of Delphi survey based on technology foresight is put forward, the evaluation index system of priority domains is established, and the index calculation method is determined. Afterwards, statistical method is used to evaluate the alternative domains. Finally the top four priority domains are determined as follows: Interconnected Network Planning and Simulation Analysis, Interconnected Network Safety Control and Protection, Intelligent Power Transmission and Transformation, and Internet of Things.

48 CFR 808.603 - Purchase priorities.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 48 Federal Acquisition Regulations System 5 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Purchase priorities. 808... Industries, Inc. (FPI) 808.603 Purchase priorities. Contracting officers may purchase supplies and services... small businesses, in accordance with procedures set forth in subpart 819.70, without seeking a waiver...

36 CFR 230.4 - State program administration.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... and set priorities for achieving the goals and objectives identified for the State for each year. (2... planting, maintenance, and improvement, and other high priority practices within the State that will result... appropriate Service Representative; (9) Guidelines for establishing annual priorities for the approval of...

45 CFR 1620.1 - Purpose.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... Regulations Relating to Public Welfare (Continued) LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION PRIORITIES IN USE OF RESOURCES § 1620.1 Purpose. This part is designed to provide guidance to recipients for setting priorities and to ensure that a recipient's governing body adopts written priorities for the types of cases and matters...

Priority to End of Life Treatments? Views of the Public in the Netherlands.

PubMed

Wouters, Sofie; van Exel, Job; Baker, Rachel; B F Brouwer, Werner

2017-01-01

Recent debates in the Netherlands on health care priority setting have focused on the relative value of gains generated by life-extending medicines for people with a terminal illness, mostly new cancer drugs. These treatments are generally expensive, provide relatively small health gains, and therefore usually do not meet common cost per QALY thresholds. Nevertheless, these drugs may be provided under the assumption that there is public support for making a special case for treatments for people with a terminal illness. This study investigated the views of the public in the Netherlands on a range of equity and efficiency considerations relevant to priority setting and examines whether there is public support for making such a special case. Using Q methodology, three viewpoints on important principles for priority setting were identified. Data were collected through ranking exercises conducted by 46 members of the general public in the Netherlands, including 11 respondents with personal experience with cancer. Viewpoint 1 emphasized that people have equal rights to healthcare and opposed priority setting on any ground. Viewpoint 2 emphasized that the care for terminal patients should at all times respect the patients' quality of life, which sometimes means refraining from invasive treatments. Viewpoint 3 had a strong focus on effective and efficient care and had no moral objection against priority setting under certain circumstances. Overall, we found little public support for the assumption that health gains in terminally ill patients are more valuable than those in other patients. This implies that the assumption that society is prepared to pay more for health gains in people who have only a short period of lifetime left does not correspond with societal preferences in the Netherlands. Copyright © 2017 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Perspectives of Patients, Caregivers and Researchers on Research Priorities in Donation and Transplantation in Canada: A Pilot Workshop.

PubMed

Allard, Julie; Durand, Céline; Anthony, Samantha J; Dumez, Vincent; Hartell, David; Hébert, Marie-Josée; West, Lori J; Wright, Linda; Fortin, Marie-Chantal

2017-02-01

It is vitally important to seek input from key stakeholders to increase the quality and relevance of health-related research and accelerate its adoption into practice. Patients and caregivers have rarely been involved in setting research priorities in the transplantation and donation field. The objectives of this explorative study are: (i) to discuss research priorities within the Canadian National Transplant Research Program during a priority-setting exercise with patients, caregivers, organ donors and researchers and (ii) to compare the identified priorities with research published in 2 prestigious transplantation journals. A pilot workshop attended by 10 patients and caregivers and 5 researchers was held in Montréal (Quebec, Canada) in August 2014 to identify research priorities. Priorities were identified using a thematic analysis of the workshop transcription conducted by multiple coders. These priorities were compared with the topics of research articles published in 2 major transplantation journals between 2012 and 2014. The themes of the 10 research priorities identified by study participants were related to different research domains: social, cultural, and environmental health factors (4); biomedical or clinical (4); and research about health systems and services (2). 26.7% of the research articles published were related to the identified priorities. Thirteen percent looked at ways to improve graft survival and 8.5% looked at the development of tolerance, 2 priorities identified by participants. Fewer than 5% examined the other 8 research priorities identified as important by workshop participants. This is the first study reporting patients' and researchers' priorities in the field of transplantation and donation in Canada. There is a discrepancy between topics that key stakeholders find important and research published in 2 major transplantation journals. The research priorities identified during our initial workshop will be validated through a national survey and workshop.

What are the dietary treatment research priorities for inflammatory bowel disease? A short report based on a priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.

PubMed

Lomer, M C; Hart, A L; Verjee, A; Daly, A; Solomon, J; Mclaughlin, J

2017-12-01

Treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) involves a multidisciplinary approach comprising medical management and sometimes surgery. Although diet is central to IBD management, the optimal diet for patients with IBD is uncertain. A UK collaborative partnership within the James Lind Alliance was set up between patients, clinicians and other stakeholders to develop research priorities in IBD. The aim of this short report is to provide a comprehensive summary of the research priority findings relating to diet in the treatment of IBD. The James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership process was used to develop research priorities in IBD. In brief, patients, clinicians and other stakeholders were invited to provide up to five treatment uncertainties in IBD. These uncertainties were collated, revised and ranked, leading to a final top 10 research questions in IBD. A total of 1671 uncertainties from 531 participants were collected and refined to exclude duplicates leaving 1253 uncertainties. Of these, 348 were categorised as diet-related and grouped according to topic. There were 206 uncertainties related to how diet can be used to treat IBD or alleviate symptoms. Seventy-two percent of diet-related questions came from patients. One broadly diet-related and two diet-specific treatment uncertainties were included in the top 10 research priorities for IBD. Dietary treatment options in the management of IBD are important research priorities. Almost three-quarters of diet related questions came from patients, who were particularly interested in how diet can impact disease activity and symptom control. © 2017 The British Dietetic Association Ltd.

Shared research priorities for pessary use in women with prolapse: results from a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.

PubMed

Lough, Kate; Hagen, Suzanne; McClurg, Doreen; Pollock, Alex

2018-04-28

To identify the shared priorities for future research of women affected by and clinicians involved with pessary use for the management of prolapse. A priority setting project using a consensus method. A James Lind Alliance Pessary use for prolapse Priority Setting Partnership (JLA Pessary PSP) conducted from May 2016 to September 2017 in the UK. The PSP was run by a Steering Group of three women with experience of pessary use, three experienced clinicians involved with management of prolapse, two researchers with relevant experience, a JLA adviser and a PSP leader. Two surveys were conducted in 2016 and 2017. The first gathered questions about pessaries, and the second asked respondents to prioritise a list of questions. A final workshop was held on 8 September 2017 involving 10 women and 13 clinician representatives with prolapse and pessary experience. A top 10 list of priorities for future research in pessary use for prolapse was agreed by consensus. Women with experience of pessary use and clinicians involved with prolapse management have worked together to determine shared priorities for future research. Aligning the top 10 results with existing research findings will highlight the gaps in current evidence and signpost future research to areas of priority. Effective dissemination of the results will enable research funding bodies to focus on gathering the evidence to answer the questions that matter most to those who will be affected. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

A Needs Assessment to Identify the Reality of Two Rural School Cases in South Africa: Potential for ICT4D or Not?

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Pade-Khene, C.

2012-01-01

Understanding the potential or need for ICT support in education within developing countries, requires an in-depth needs assessment to comprehend, elaborate and set the desired priorities of rural schools. A Needs Assessment was conducted as part of an on-going comprehensive evaluation process of an ICT for development project, the Siyakhula…

Evaluation of the Cognitive Structures of the Middle School Students about the Concept of "Water Pollution" by Using Free Word Association Test

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bingol, Haluk

2017-01-01

It is necessary to focus on environmental education at every stage of education in order to raise the awareness of the students about the environment and make the information permanent. Before setting priorities for educational policy and taking precautions, necessary studies relating the determining the views of the students should be performed.…

Accommodating non-market values in evaluation of wildfire management in the United States: Challenges and opportunities

Treesearch

Tyron J. Venn; David E. Calkin

2011-01-01

Forests in the United States generate many non-market benefits for society that can be enhanced and diminished by wildfire and wildfire management. The Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy (1995, updated 2001), and subsequent Guidance to the Implementation of that policy provided in 2009, require fire management priorities be set on the basis of values to be...

Fit for purpose? Introducing a rational priority setting approach into a community care setting.

PubMed

Cornelissen, Evelyn; Mitton, Craig; Davidson, Alan; Reid, Colin; Hole, Rachelle; Visockas, Anne-Marie; Smith, Neale

2016-06-20

Purpose - Program budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA) is a priority setting approach that assists decision makers with allocating resources. Previous PBMA work establishes its efficacy and indicates that contextual factors complicate priority setting, which can hamper PBMA effectiveness. The purpose of this paper is to gain qualitative insight into PBMA effectiveness. Design/methodology/approach - A Canadian case study of PBMA implementation. Data consist of decision-maker interviews pre (n=20), post year-1 (n=12) and post year-2 (n=9) of PBMA to examine perceptions of baseline priority setting practice vis-à-vis desired practice, and perceptions of PBMA usability and acceptability. Findings - Fit emerged as a key theme in determining PBMA effectiveness. Fit herein refers to being of suitable quality and form to meet the intended purposes and needs of the end-users, and includes desirability, acceptability, and usability dimensions. Results confirm decision-maker desire for rational approaches like PBMA. However, most participants indicated that the timing of the exercise and the form in which PBMA was applied were not well-suited for this case study. Participant acceptance of and buy-in to PBMA changed during the study: a leadership change, limited organizational commitment, and concerns with organizational capacity were key barriers to PBMA adoption and thereby effectiveness. Practical implications - These findings suggest that a potential way-forward includes adding a contextual readiness/capacity assessment stage to PBMA, recognizing organizational complexity, and considering incremental adoption of PBMA's approach. Originality/value - These insights help us to better understand and work with priority setting conditions to advance evidence-informed decision making.

Multicriteria decision analysis for including health interventions in the universal health coverage benefit package in Thailand.

PubMed

Youngkong, Sitaporn; Baltussen, Rob; Tantivess, Sripen; Mohara, Adun; Teerawattananon, Yot

2012-01-01

Considering rising health expenditure on the one hand and increasing public expectations on the other hand, there is a need for explicit health care rationing to secure public acceptance of coverage decisions of health interventions. The National Health Security Office, the institute managing the Universal Coverage Scheme in Thailand, recently called for more rational, transparent, and fair decisions on the public reimbursement of health interventions. This article describes the application of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) to guide the coverage decisions on including health interventions in the Universal Coverage Scheme health benefit package in the period 2009-2010. We described the MCDA priority-setting process through participatory observation and evaluated the rational, transparency, and fairness of the priority-setting process against the accountability for reasonableness framework. The MCDA was applied in four steps: 1) 17 interventions were nominated for assessment; 2) nine interventions were selected for further quantitative assessment on the basis of the following criteria: size of population affected by disease, severity of disease, effectiveness of health intervention, variation in practice, economic impact on household expenditure, and equity and social implications; 3) these interventions were then assessed in terms of cost-effectiveness and budget impact; and 4) decision makers qualitatively appraised, deliberated, and reached consensus on which interventions should be adopted in the package. This project was carried out in a real-world context and has considerably contributed to the rational, transparent, and fair priority-setting process through the application of MCDA. Although the present project has applied MCDA in the Thai context, MCDA is adaptable to other settings. Copyright © 2012 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Setting Priorities for Gerontological Social Work Research: A National Delphi Study

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Burnette, Denise; Morrow-Howell, Nancy; Chen, Li-Mei

2003-01-01

Purpose: An increasingly important task for all disciplines involved in aging research is to identify and prioritize areas for investigation. This article reports the results of a national Delphi study on setting research priorities for gerontological social work. Design and Methods: Delphi methodology, a structured process for eliciting and…

Integrating Public Input into Healthcare Priority-Setting Decisions

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Mitton, Craig; Smith, Neale; Peacock, Stuart; Evoy, Brian; Abelson, Julia

2011-01-01

Decision makers are pressed to involve the public in priority setting. However, public input is only one form of evidence. So, how can information from the public be combined with other knowledge? The authors qualitatively analysed articles that explicitly address this question. We identified the other forms of information that tend to be used in…

Setting priorities to address cardiovascular diseases through universal health coverage in low- and middle-income countries.

PubMed

Watkins, David A; Nugent, Rachel A

2017-01-01

Over the past decade, universal health coverage (UHC) has emerged as a major policy goal for many low- and middle-income country governments. Yet, despite the high burden of cardiovascular diseases (CVD), relatively little is known about how to address CVD through UHC. This review covers three major topics. First, we define UHC and provide some context for its importance, and then we illustrate its relevance to CVD prevention and treatment. Second, we discuss how countries might select high-priority CVD interventions for a UHC health benefits package drawing on economic evaluation methods. Third, we explore some implementation challenges and identify research gaps that, if addressed, could improve the inclusion of CVD into UHC.

Priority setting in health care: trends and models from Scandinavian experiences.

PubMed

Hofmann, Bjørn

2013-08-01

The Scandinavian welfare states have public health care systems which have universal coverage and traditionally low influence of private insurance and private provision. Due to raises in costs, elaborate public control of health care, and a significant technological development in health care, priority setting came on the public agenda comparatively early in the Scandinavian countries. The development of health care priority setting has been partly homogeneous and appears to follow certain phases. This can be of broader interest as it may shed light on alternative models and strategies in health care priority setting. Some general trends have been identified: from principles to procedures, from closed to open processes, and from experts to participation. Five general approaches have been recognized: The moral principles and values based approach, the moral principles and economic assessment approach, the procedural approach, the expert based practice defining approach, and the participatory practice defining approach. There are pros and cons with all of these approaches. For the time being the fifth approach appears attractive, but its lack of true participation and the lack of clear success criteria may pose significant challenges in the future.

Establishing research priorities relating to the long-term impact of TIA and minor stroke through stakeholder-centred consensus.

PubMed

Turner, Grace M; Backman, Ruth; McMullan, Christel; Mathers, Jonathan; Marshall, Tom; Calvert, Melanie

2018-01-01

What is the problem and why is this important? Mini-strokes are similar to full strokes, but symptoms last less than 24 h. Many people (up to 70%) have long-term problems after a mini-stroke, such as anxiety; depression; problems with brain functioning (like memory loss); and fatigue (feeling tired). However, the current healthcare pathway only focuses on preventing another stroke and care for other long-term problems is not routinely given. Without proper treatment, people with long-term problems after a mini-stroke could have worse quality of life and may find it difficult to return to work and their social activities. What is the aim of the research? We wanted to understand the research priorities of patients, health care professionals and key stakeholders relating to the long-term impact of mini-stroke. How did we address the problem? We invited patients, clinicians, researchers and other stakeholders to attend a meeting. At the meeting people discussed the issues relating to the long-term impact of mini-stroke and came to an agreement on their research priorities. There were three stages: (1) people wrote down their individual research suggestions; (2) in smaller groups people came to an agreement on what their top research questions were; and (3) the whole group agreed final research priorities. What did we find? Eleven people attended who were representatives for patients, GPs, stroke consultants, stroke nurses, psychologists, the Stroke Association (charity) and stroke researchers, The group agreed on eleven research questions which they felt were the most important to improve health and well-being for people who have had a mini-stroke.The eleven research questions encompass a range of categories, including: understanding the existing care patients receive (according to diagnosis and geographical location); exploring what optimal care post-TIA/minor stroke should comprise (identifying and treating impairments, information giving and support groups) and how that care should be delivered (clinical setting and follow-up pathway); impact on family members; and education/training for health care professionals. Background Clinical management after transient ischaemic attack (TIA) and minor stroke focuses on stroke prevention. However, evidence demonstrates that many patients experience ongoing residual impairments. Residual impairments post-TIA and minor stroke may affect patients' quality of life and return to work or social activities. Research priorities of patients, health care professionals and key stakeholders relating to the long-term impact of TIA and minor stroke are unknown. Methods Our objective was to establish the top shared research priorities relating to the long-term impact of TIA and minor stroke through stakeholder-centred consensus. A one-day priority setting consensus meeting took place with representatives from different stakeholder groups in October 2016 (Birmingham, UK). Nominal group technique was used to establish research priorities. This involved three stages: (i) gathering research priorities from individual stakeholders; (ii) interim prioritisation in three subgroups; and (iii) final priority setting. Results The priority setting consensus meeting was attended by 11 stakeholders. The individual stakeholders identified 34 different research priorities. During the interim prioritisation exercise, the three subgroups generated 24 unique research priorities which were discussed as a whole group. Following the final consensus discussion, 11 shared research priorities were unanimously agreed.The 11 research questions encompass a range of categories, including: understanding the existing care patients receive (according to diagnosis and geographical location); exploring what optimal care post-TIA/minor stroke should comprise (identifying and treating impairments, information giving and support groups) and how that care should be delivered (clinical setting and follow-up pathway); impact on family members; and education/training for health care professionals. Conclusions Eleven different research priorities were established through stakeholder-centred consensus. These research questions could usefully inform the research agenda and policy decisions for TIA and minor stroke. Inclusion of stakeholders in setting research priorities is important to increase the relevance of research and reduce research waste.

34 CFR 74.11 - Pre-award policies.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... services for the direct benefit or use of the Federal Government. (b) Public notice and priority setting. The Secretary notifies the public of intended funding priorities for discretionary grant programs, unless funding priorities are established by Federal statute. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3, 3474; OMB...

45 CFR 1620.5 - Annual review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... Welfare Regulations Relating to Public Welfare (Continued) LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION PRIORITIES IN USE OF RESOURCES § 1620.5 Annual review. (a) Priorities shall be set periodically and shall be reviewed by the... number of emergency cases outside of its priorities. (b) The following factors should be among those...

75 FR 34249 - Centers for Independent Living Program-Training and Technical Assistance

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-06-16

... rural settings. To meet this priority, applicants must demonstrate all of the following in their... and Rehabilitative Services, Department of Education. ACTION: Notice of final priority. SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services announces a priority under the Centers...

Future Research Priorities for Morbidity Control of Lymphedema.

PubMed

Narahari, S R; Aggithaya, Madhur Guruprasad; Moffatt, Christine; Ryan, T J; Keeley, Vaughan; Vijaya, B; Rajendran, P; Karalam, S B; Rajagopala, S; Kumar, N K; Bose, K S; Sushma, K V

2017-01-01

Innovation in the treatment of lower extremity lymphedema has received low priority from the governments and pharmaceutical industry. Advancing lymphedema is irreversible and initiates fibrosis in the dermis, reactive changes in the epidermis and subcutis. Most medical treatments offered for lymphedema are either too demanding with a less than satisfactory response or patients have low concordance due to complex schedules. A priority setting partnership (PSP) was established to decide on the future priorities in lymphedema research. A table of abstracts following a literature search was published in workshop website. Stake holders were requested to upload their priorities. Their questions were listed, randomized, and sent to lymphologists for ranking. High ranked ten research priorities, obtained through median score, were presented in final prioritization work shop attended by invited stake holders. A free medical camp was organized during workshop to understand patients' priorities. One hundred research priorities were selected from priorities uploaded to website. Ten priorities were short listed through a peer review process involving 12 lymphologists, for final discussion. They were related to simplification of integrative treatment for lymphedema, cellular changes in lymphedema and mechanisms of its reversal, eliminating bacterial entry lesions to reduce cellulitis episodes, exploring evidence for therapies in traditional medicine, improving patient concordance to compression therapy, epidemiology of lymphatic filariasis (LF), and economic benefit of integrative treatments of lymphedema. A robust research priority setting process, organized as described in James Lind Alliance guidebook, identified seven priority areas to achieve effective morbidity control of lymphedema including LF. All stake holders including Department of Health Research, Government of India, participated in the PSP.

Future Research Priorities for Morbidity Control of Lymphedema

PubMed Central

Narahari, S R; Aggithaya, Madhur Guruprasad; Moffatt, Christine; Ryan, T J; Keeley, Vaughan; Vijaya, B; Rajendran, P; Karalam, S B; Rajagopala, S; Kumar, N K; Bose, K S; Sushma, K V

2017-01-01

Background: Innovation in the treatment of lower extremity lymphedema has received low priority from the governments and pharmaceutical industry. Advancing lymphedema is irreversible and initiates fibrosis in the dermis, reactive changes in the epidermis and subcutis. Most medical treatments offered for lymphedema are either too demanding with a less than satisfactory response or patients have low concordance due to complex schedules. A priority setting partnership (PSP) was established to decide on the future priorities in lymphedema research. Methods: A table of abstracts following a literature search was published in workshop website. Stake holders were requested to upload their priorities. Their questions were listed, randomized, and sent to lymphologists for ranking. High ranked ten research priorities, obtained through median score, were presented in final prioritization work shop attended by invited stake holders. A free medical camp was organized during workshop to understand patients’ priorities. Results: One hundred research priorities were selected from priorities uploaded to website. Ten priorities were short listed through a peer review process involving 12 lymphologists, for final discussion. They were related to simplification of integrative treatment for lymphedema, cellular changes in lymphedema and mechanisms of its reversal, eliminating bacterial entry lesions to reduce cellulitis episodes, exploring evidence for therapies in traditional medicine, improving patient concordance to compression therapy, epidemiology of lymphatic filariasis (LF), and economic benefit of integrative treatments of lymphedema. Conclusion: A robust research priority setting process, organized as described in James Lind Alliance guidebook, identified seven priority areas to achieve effective morbidity control of lymphedema including LF. All stake holders including Department of Health Research, Government of India, participated in the PSP. PMID:28216723

Priority setting of ICU resources in an influenza pandemic: a qualitative study of the Canadian public's perspectives

PubMed Central

2012-01-01

Background Pandemic influenza may exacerbate existing scarcity of life-saving medical resources. As a result, decision-makers may be faced with making tough choices about who will receive care and who will have to wait or go without. Although previous studies have explored ethical issues in priority setting from the perspective of clinicians and policymakers, there has been little investigation into how the public views priority setting during a pandemic influenza, in particular related to intensive care resources. Methods To bridge this gap, we conducted three public town hall meetings across Canada to explore Canadian's perspectives on this ethical challenge. Town hall discussions group discussions were digitally recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Results Six interrelated themes emerged from the town hall discussions related to: ethical and empirical starting points for deliberation; criteria for setting priorities; pre-crisis planning; in-crisis decision-making; the need for public deliberation and input; and participants' deliberative struggle with the ethical issues. Conclusions Our findings underscore the importance of public consultation in pandemic planning for sustaining public trust in a public health emergency. Participants appreciated the empirical and ethical uncertainty of decision-making in an influenza pandemic and demonstrated nuanced ethical reasoning about priority setting of intensive care resources in an influenza pandemic. Policymakers may benefit from a better understanding the public's empirical and ethical 'starting points' in developing effective pandemic plans. PMID:22449119

Protecting Biodiversity when Money Matters: Maximizing Return on Investment

PubMed Central

Underwood, Emma C.; Shaw, M. Rebecca; Wilson, Kerrie A.; Kareiva, Peter; Klausmeyer, Kirk R.; McBride, Marissa F.; Bode, Michael; Morrison, Scott A.; Hoekstra, Jonathan M.; Possingham, Hugh P.

2008-01-01

Background Conventional wisdom identifies biodiversity hotspots as priorities for conservation investment because they capture dense concentrations of species. However, density of species does not necessarily imply conservation ‘efficiency’. Here we explicitly consider conservation efficiency in terms of species protected per dollar invested. Methodology/Principal Findings We apply a dynamic return on investment approach to a global biome and compare it with three alternate priority setting approaches and a random allocation of funding. After twenty years of acquiring habitat, the return on investment approach protects between 32% and 69% more species compared to the other priority setting approaches. To correct for potential inefficiencies of protecting the same species multiple times we account for the complementarity of species, protecting up to three times more distinct vertebrate species than alternate approaches. Conclusions/Significance Incorporating costs in a return on investment framework expands priorities to include areas not traditionally highlighted as priorities based on conventional irreplaceability and vulnerability approaches. PMID:18231601

Use of survey data to define regional and local priorities for management on National Wildlife Refuges

USGS Publications Warehouse

Sauer, J.R.; Casey, J.; Laskowski, H.; Taylor, J.D.; Fallon, J.; Ralph, C. John; Rich, Terrell D.

2005-01-01

National Wildlife Refuges must manage habitats to support a variety of species that often have conflicting needs. To make reasonable management decisions, managers must know what species are priorities for their refuges and the relative importance of the species. Unfortunately, species priorities are often set regionally, but refuges must develop local priorities that reconcile regional priorities with constraints imposed by refuge location and local management options. Some species cannot be managed on certain refuges, and the relative benefit of management to regional populations of species can vary greatly among refuges. We describe a process of 'stepping down' regional priorities to local priorities for bird species of management interest. We define three primary scales of management interest: regional (at which overall priority species are set); 'Sepik Blocks' (30 min blocks of latitude and longitude, which provide a landscape level context for a refuge); and the refuge. Regional surveys, such as the North American Breeding Bird Survey, provide information that can be summarized at regional and Sepik Block scales, permitting regional priorities to be focused to landscapes near refuges. However, refuges manage habitats, and managers need information about how the habitat management is likely to collectively influence the priority species. The value of the refuge for a species is also influenced by the availability of habitats within refuges and the relative amounts of those habitats at each scale. We use remotely-sensed data to assess proportions of habitats at the three geographic scales. These data provide many possible approaches for developing local priorities for management. Once these are defined, managers can use the priorities, in conjunction with predictions of the consequences of management for each species, to assess the overall benefit of alternative management actions for the priority species.

Prioritized Contact Transport Stream

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Hunt, Walter Lee, Jr. (Inventor)

2015-01-01

A detection process, contact recognition process, classification process, and identification process are applied to raw sensor data to produce an identified contact record set containing one or more identified contact records. A prioritization process is applied to the identified contact record set to assign a contact priority to each contact record in the identified contact record set. Data are removed from the contact records in the identified contact record set based on the contact priorities assigned to those contact records. A first contact stream is produced from the resulting contact records. The first contact stream is streamed in a contact transport stream. The contact transport stream may include and stream additional contact streams. The contact transport stream may be varied dynamically over time based on parameters such as available bandwidth, contact priority, presence/absence of contacts, system state, and configuration parameters.

38 CFR 61.44 - Awarding special needs grants.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

...) Applicants will first be grouped in categories according to the funding priorities set forth in the NOFA, if... highest-ranked applications for which funding is available, within highest priority funding category if... order, as determined under § 61.43 of this part. If funding priorities have been established and funds...

38 CFR 61.32 - Ranking non-capital grant recipients for per diem.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... Availability will be reviewed and grouped in categories according to the funding priorities set forth in the... available, within highest priority funding category if applicable, will be conditionally selected for eligibility to receive per diem payments in accordance with their ranked order. If funding priorities have...

38 CFR 61.54 - Awarding technical assistance grants.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

...) Applicants will first be grouped in categories according to the funding priorities set forth in the NOFA, if... highest-ranked applications for which funding is available, within highest priority funding category if... ranked order, as determined under § 61.53 of this part. If funding priorities have been established and...

38 CFR 61.14 - Selecting applications for capital grants.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... capital grants. (a) Applicants will first be grouped in categories according to the funding priorities set... applicable. The highest-ranked applications for which funding is available, within highest priority funding... ranked order, as determined under § 61.13 of this part. If funding priorities have been established and...

12 CFR 1806.203 - Selection Process, actual award amounts.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... Community Financing Activities, ranked in the order set forth in the applicable NOFA. (3) Third Priority. If... amounts based on the process described in this section. (c) Priority of Awards. The Fund will rank Applicants in each category of Qualified Activity according to the priorities described in this paragraph (c...

The evolution of PBMA: towards a macro-level priority setting framework for health regions.

PubMed

Mitton, Craig R; Donaldson, Cam; Waldner, Howard; Eagle, Chris

2003-11-01

To date, relatively little work on priority setting has been carried out at a macro-level across major portfolios within integrated health care organizations. This paper describes a macro marginal analysis (MMA) process for setting priorities and allocating resources in health authorities, based on work carried out in a major urban health region in Alberta, Canada. MMA centers around an expert working group of managers and clinicians who are charged with identifying areas for resource re-allocation on an ongoing basis. Trade-offs between services are based on locally defined criteria and are informed by multiple inputs such as evidence from the literature and local expert opinion. The approach is put forth as a significant improvement on historical resource allocation patterns.

Top ten research priorities for spinal cord injury: the methodology and results of a British priority setting partnership.

PubMed

van Middendorp, J J; Allison, H C; Ahuja, S; Bracher, D; Dyson, C; Fairbank, J; Gall, A; Glover, A; Gray, L; Masri, W El; Uttridge, A; Cowan, K

2016-05-01

This is a mixed-method consensus development project. The objective of this study was to identify a top ten list of priorities for future research into spinal cord injury (SCI). The British Spinal Cord Injury Priority Setting Partnership was established in 2013 and completed in 2014. Stakeholders included consumer organisations, healthcare professional societies and caregivers. This partnership involved the following four key stages: (i) gathering of research questions, (ii) checking of existing research evidence, (iii) interim prioritisation and (iv) a final consensus meeting to reach agreement on the top ten research priorities. Adult individuals with spinal cord dysfunction because of trauma or non-traumatic causes, including transverse myelitis, and individuals with a cauda equina syndrome (henceforth grouped and referred to as SCI) were invited to participate in this priority setting partnership. We collected 784 questions from 403 survey respondents (290 individuals with SCI), which, after merging duplicate questions and checking systematic reviews for evidence, were reduced to 109 unique unanswered research questions. A total of 293 people (211 individuals with SCI) participated in the interim prioritisation process, leading to the identification of 25 priorities. At a final consensus meeting, a representative group of individuals with SCI, caregivers and health professionals agreed on their top ten research priorities. Following a comprehensive, rigorous and inclusive process, with participation from individuals with SCI, caregivers and health professionals, the SCI research agenda has been defined by people to whom it matters most and should inform the scope and future activities of funders and researchers for the years to come. The NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre provided core funding for this project.

Method and apparatus for granting processors access to a resource

DOEpatents

Blumrich, Matthias A.; Salapura, Valentina

2010-03-16

An apparatus and method for granting one or more requesting entities access to a resource in a predetermined time interval. The apparatus includes a first circuit receiving one or more request signals, and implementing logic for assigning a priority to the one or more request signals, and, generating a set of first_request signals based on the priorities assigned. One or more priority select circuits for receiving the set of first_request signals and generating corresponding one or more fixed grant signals representing one or more highest priority request signals when asserted during the predetermined time interval. A second circuit device receives the one or more fixed grant signals generates one or more grant signals associated with one or more highest priority request signals assigned, the grant signals for enabling one or more respective requesting entities access to the resource in the predetermined time interval, wherein the priority assigned to the one or more request signals changes each successive predetermined time interval. In one embodiment, the assigned priority is based on a numerical pattern, the first circuit changing the numerical pattern with respect to the first_request signals generated at each successive predetermined time interval.

Nuclear Data Needs for the Neutronic Design of MYRRHA Fast Spectrum Research Reactor

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Stankovskiy, A.; Malambu, E.; Van den Eynde, G.; Díez, C. J.

2014-04-01

A global sensitivity analysis of effective neutron multiplication factor to the change of nuclear data library has been performed. It revealed that the test version of JEFF-3.2 neutron-induced evaluated data library produces closer results to ENDF/B-VII.1 than JEFF-3.1.2 does. The analysis of contributions of individual evaluations into keff sensitivity resulted in the priority list of nuclides, uncertainties on cross sections and fission neutron multiplicities of which have to be improved by setting up dedicated differential and integral experiments.

How countries cope with competing demands and expectations: perspectives of different stakeholders on priority setting and resource allocation for health in the era of HIV and AIDS

PubMed Central

2012-01-01

Background Health systems have experienced unprecedented stress in recent years, and as yet no consensus has emerged as to how to deal with the multiple burden of disease in the context of HIV and AIDS and other competing health priorities. Priority setting is essential, yet this is a complex, multifaceted process. Drawing on a study conducted in five African countries, this paper explores different stakeholders′ perceptions of health priorities, how priorities are defined in practice, the process of resource allocation for HIV and Health and how different stakeholders perceive this. Methods A sub-analysis was conducted of selected data from a wider qualitative study that explored the interactions between health systems and HIV and AIDS responses in five sub-Saharan countries (Burkina Faso, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, Madagascar and Malawi). Key background documents were analysed and semi-structured interviews (n = 258) and focus group discussions (n = 45) were held with representatives of communities, health personnel, decision makers, civil society representatives and development partners at both national and district level. Results Health priorities were expressed either in terms of specific health problems and diseases or gaps in service delivery requiring a strengthening of the overall health system. In all five countries study respondents (with the exception of community members in Ghana) identified malaria and HIV as the two top health priorities. Community representatives were more likely to report concerns about accessibility of services and quality of care. National level respondents often referred to wider systemic challenges in relation to achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Indeed, actual priority setting was heavily influenced by international agendas (e.g. MDGs) and by the ways in which development partners were supporting national strategic planning processes. At the same time, multi-stakeholder processes were increasingly used to identify priorities and inform sector-wide planning, whereby health service statistics were used to rank the burden of disease. However, many respondents remarked that health system challenges are not captured by such statistics. In all countries funding for health was reported to fall short of requirements and a need for further priority setting to match actual resource availability was identified. Pooled health sector funds have been established to some extent, but development partners′ lack of flexibility in the allocation of funds according to country-generated priorities was identified as a major constraint. Conclusions Although we found consensus on health priorities across all levels in the study countries, current funding falls short of addressing these identified areas. The nature of external funding, as well as programme-specific investment, was found to distort priority setting. There are signs that existing interventions have had limited effects beyond meeting the needs of disease-specific programmes. A need for more comprehensive health system strengthening (HSS) was identified, which requires a strong vision as to what the term means, coupled with a clear strategy and commitment from national and international decision makers in order to achieve stated goals. Prospective studies and action research, accompanied by pilot programmes, are recommended as deliberate strategies for HSS. PMID:23231820

How countries cope with competing demands and expectations: perspectives of different stakeholders on priority setting and resource allocation for health in the era of HIV and AIDS.

PubMed

Jenniskens, Françoise; Tiendrebeogo, Georges; Coolen, Anne; Blok, Lucie; Kouanda, Seni; Sataru, Fuseini; Ralisimalala, Andriamampianina; Mwapasa, Victor; Kiyombo, Mbela; Plummer, David

2012-12-11

Health systems have experienced unprecedented stress in recent years, and as yet no consensus has emerged as to how to deal with the multiple burden of disease in the context of HIV and AIDS and other competing health priorities. Priority setting is essential, yet this is a complex, multifaceted process. Drawing on a study conducted in five African countries, this paper explores different stakeholders' perceptions of health priorities, how priorities are defined in practice, the process of resource allocation for HIV and Health and how different stakeholders perceive this. A sub-analysis was conducted of selected data from a wider qualitative study that explored the interactions between health systems and HIV and AIDS responses in five sub-Saharan countries (Burkina Faso, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, Madagascar and Malawi). Key background documents were analysed and semi-structured interviews (n = 258) and focus group discussions (n = 45) were held with representatives of communities, health personnel, decision makers, civil society representatives and development partners at both national and district level. Health priorities were expressed either in terms of specific health problems and diseases or gaps in service delivery requiring a strengthening of the overall health system. In all five countries study respondents (with the exception of community members in Ghana) identified malaria and HIV as the two top health priorities. Community representatives were more likely to report concerns about accessibility of services and quality of care. National level respondents often referred to wider systemic challenges in relation to achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Indeed, actual priority setting was heavily influenced by international agendas (e.g. MDGs) and by the ways in which development partners were supporting national strategic planning processes. At the same time, multi-stakeholder processes were increasingly used to identify priorities and inform sector-wide planning, whereby health service statistics were used to rank the burden of disease. However, many respondents remarked that health system challenges are not captured by such statistics.In all countries funding for health was reported to fall short of requirements and a need for further priority setting to match actual resource availability was identified. Pooled health sector funds have been established to some extent, but development partners' lack of flexibility in the allocation of funds according to country-generated priorities was identified as a major constraint. Although we found consensus on health priorities across all levels in the study countries, current funding falls short of addressing these identified areas. The nature of external funding, as well as programme-specific investment, was found to distort priority setting. There are signs that existing interventions have had limited effects beyond meeting the needs of disease-specific programmes. A need for more comprehensive health system strengthening (HSS) was identified, which requires a strong vision as to what the term means, coupled with a clear strategy and commitment from national and international decision makers in order to achieve stated goals. Prospective studies and action research, accompanied by pilot programmes, are recommended as deliberate strategies for HSS.

A population-based model for priority setting across the care continuum and across modalities

PubMed Central

Segal, Leonie; Mortimer, Duncan

2006-01-01

Background The Health-sector Wide (HsW) priority setting model is designed to shift the focus of priority setting away from 'program budgets' – that are typically defined by modality or disease-stage – and towards well-defined target populations with a particular disease/health problem. Methods The key features of the HsW model are i) a disease/health problem framework, ii) a sequential approach to covering the entire health sector, iii) comprehensiveness of scope in identifying intervention options and iv) the use of objective evidence. The HsW model redefines the unit of analysis over which priorities are set to include all mutually exclusive and complementary interventions for the prevention and treatment of each disease/health problem under consideration. The HsW model is therefore incompatible with the fragmented approach to priority setting across multiple program budgets that currently characterises allocation in many health systems. The HsW model employs standard cost-utility analyses and decision-rules with the aim of maximising QALYs contingent upon the global budget constraint for the set of diseases/health problems under consideration. It is recognised that the objective function may include non-health arguments that would imply a departure from simple QALY maximisation and that political constraints frequently limit degrees of freedom. In addressing these broader considerations, the HsW model can be modified to maximise value-weighted QALYs contingent upon the global budget constraint and any political constraints bearing upon allocation decisions. Results The HsW model has been applied in several contexts, recently to osteoarthritis, that has demonstrated both its practical application and its capacity to derive clear evidenced-based policy recommendations. Conclusion Comparisons with other approaches to priority setting, such as Programme Budgeting and Marginal Analysis (PBMA) and modality-based cost-effectiveness comparisons, as typified by Australia's Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee process for the listing of pharmaceuticals for government funding, demonstrate the value added by the HsW model notably in its greater likelihood of contributing to allocative efficiency. PMID:16566841

Delays in Prior Living Kidney Donors Receiving Priority on the Transplant Waiting List

PubMed Central

Klassen, David K.; Kucheryavaya, Anna Y.; Stewart, Darren E.

2016-01-01

Background and objectives Prior living donors (PLDs) receive very high priority on the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) kidney waiting list. Program delays in adding PLDs to the waiting list, setting their status to active, and submitting requests for PLD priority can affect timely access to transplantation. Design, setting, participants, & measurements We used the OPTN and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data to examine timing of (1) listing relative to start of dialysis, (2) activation on the waiting list, and (3) requests for PLD priority relative to listing date. There were 210 PLDs (221 registrations) added to the OPTN kidney waiting list between January 1, 2010 and July 31, 2015. Results As of September 4, 2015, 167 of the 210 PLDs received deceased donor transplants, six received living donor transplants, two died, five were too sick to transplant, and 29 were still waiting. Median waiting time to deceased donor transplant for PLDs was 98 days. Only 40.7% of 221 PLD registrations (n=90) were listed before they began dialysis; 68.3% were in inactive status for <90 days, 17.6% were in inactive status for 90–365 days, 8.6% were in inactive status for 1–2 years, and 5.4% were in inactive status for >2 years. Median time of PLDs waiting in active status before receiving PLD priority was 2 days (range =0–1450); 67.4% of PLDs received PLD priority within 7 days after activation, but 15.4% waited 8–30 days, 8.1% waited 1–3 months, 4.1% waited 3–12 months, and 5.0% waited >1 year in active status for PLD priority. After receiving priority, most were transplanted quickly. Median time in active status with PLD priority before deceased donor transplant was 23 days. Conclusions Fewer than one half of listed PLDs were listed before starting dialysis. Most listed PLDs are immediately set to active status and receive PLD priority quickly, but a substantial number spends time in active status without PLD priority or a large amount of time in inactive status, which affects access to timely transplants. PMID:27591296

Setting Priorities in Global Child Health Research Investments: Addressing Values of Stakeholders

PubMed Central

Kapiriri, Lydia; Tomlinson, Mark; Gibson, Jennifer; Chopra, Mickey; El Arifeen, Shams; Black, Robert E.; Rudan, Igor

2007-01-01

Aim To identify main groups of stakeholders in the process of health research priority setting and propose strategies for addressing their systems of values. Methods In three separate exercises that took place between March and June 2006 we interviewed three different groups of stakeholders: 1) members of the global research priority setting network; 2) a diverse group of national-level stakeholders from South Africa; and 3) participants at the conference related to international child health held in Washington, DC, USA. Each of the groups was administered different version of the questionnaire in which they were asked to set weights to criteria (and also minimum required thresholds, where applicable) that were a priori defined as relevant to health research priority setting by the consultants of the Child Health and Nutrition Research initiative (CHNRI). Results At the global level, the wide and diverse group of respondents placed the greatest importance (weight) to the criterion of maximum potential for disease burden reduction, while the most stringent threshold was placed on the criterion of answerability in an ethical way. Among the stakeholders’ representatives attending the international conference, the criterion of deliverability, answerability, and sustainability of health research results was proposed as the most important one. At the national level in South Africa, the greatest weight was placed on the criterion addressing the predicted impact on equity of the proposed health research. Conclusions Involving a large group of stakeholders when setting priorities in health research investments is important because the criteria of relevance to scientists and technical experts, whose knowledge and technical expertise is usually central to the process, may not be appropriate to specific contexts and in accordance with the views and values of those who invest in health research, those who benefit from it, or wider society as a whole. PMID:17948948

Economic evaluation and the Jordan Rational Drug List: an exploratory study of national-level priority setting.

PubMed

Lafi, Rania; Robinson, Suzanne; Williams, Iestyn

2012-01-01

To explore the extent of and barriers to the use of economic evaluation in compiling the Jordan Rational Drug List in the health care system of Jordan. The research reported in this article involved a case study of the Jordan Rational Drug List. Data collection methods included semi-structured interviews with decision makers and analysis of secondary documentary sources. The case study was supplemented by additional interviews with a small number of Jordanian academics involved in the production of economic evaluation. The research found that there was no formal requirement for cost-effectiveness information submitted as part of the decision-making process for the inclusion of new technologies on the Jordan Rational Drug List. Both decision makers and academics suggested that economic evidence was not influential in formulary decisions. This is unusual for national formulary bodies. The study identified a number of barriers that prevent substantive and routine use of economic evaluation. While some of these echo findings of previous studies, others-notably the extent to which the sectional interests of clinical groups and commercial (pharmaceutical) industry exert undue influence over decision making-more obviously result from the specific Jordanian context. Economic evaluation was not found to be influential in the Jordan Rational Drug List. Recommendations for improvement include enhancing capacity in relation to generating, accessing, and/or applying health economic analysis to priority setting decisions. There is a further need to incentivize the use of economic evaluation, and this requires that organizational and structural impediments be removed. Copyright © 2012 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Assessing and Improving Performance: A Longitudinal Evaluation of Priority Setting and Resource Allocation in a Canadian Health Region.

PubMed

Hall, William; Smith, Neale; Mitton, Craig; Urquhart, Bonnie; Bryan, Stirling

2017-08-22

In order to meet the challenges presented by increasing demand and scarcity of resources, healthcare organizations are faced with difficult decisions related to resource allocation. Tools to facilitate evaluation and improvement of these processes could enable greater transparency and more optimal distribution of resources. The Resource Allocation Performance Assessment Tool (RAPAT) was implemented in a healthcare organization in British Columbia, Canada. Recommendations for improvement were delivered, and a follow up evaluation exercise was conducted to assess the trajectory of the organization's priority setting and resource allocation (PSRA) process 2 years post the original evaluation. Implementation of RAPAT in the pilot organization identified strengths and weaknesses of the organization's PSRA process at the time of the original evaluation. Strengths included the use of criteria and evidence, an ability to reallocate resources, and the involvement of frontline staff in the process. Weaknesses included training, communication, and lack of program budgeting. Although the follow up revealed a regression from a more formal PSRA process, a legacy of explicit resource allocation was reported to be providing ongoing benefit for the organization. While past studies have taken a cross-sectional approach, this paper introduces the first longitudinal evaluation of PSRA in a healthcare organization. By including the strengths, weaknesses, and evolution of one organization's journey, the authors' intend that this paper will assist other healthcare leaders in meeting the challenges of allocating scarce resources. © 2018 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Bibliometric trends of health economic evaluation in Sub-Saharan Africa.

PubMed

Hernandez-Villafuerte, Karla; Li, Ryan; Hofman, Karen J

2016-08-24

Collaboration between Sub-Saharan African researchers is important for the generation and transfer of health technology assessment (HTA) evidence, in order to support priority-setting in health. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate collaboration patterns between countries. We conducted a rapid evidence assessment that included a random sample of health economic evaluations carried out in 20 countries (Angola, Botswana, Congo, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Seychelles, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Uganda). We conducted bibliometric network analysis based on all first authors with a Sub-Saharan African academic affiliation and their co-authored publications ("network-articles"). Then we produced a connection map of collaboration patterns among Sub-Saharan African researchers, reflecting the number of network-articles and the country of affiliation of the main co-authors. The sample of 119 economic evaluations mostly related to treatments of communicable diseases, in particular HIV/AIDS (42/119, 35.29 %) and malaria (26/119, 21.85 %). The 39 first authors from Sub-Saharan African institutions together co-authored 729 network-articles. The network analysis showed weak collaboration between health economic researchers in Sub-Saharan Africa, with researchers being more likely to collaborate with Europe and North America than with other African countries. South Africa stood out as producing the highest number of health economic evaluations and collaborations. The development and evaluation of HTA research networks in Sub-Saharan Africa should be supported, with South Africa central to any such efforts. Organizations and institutions from high income countries interested in supporting priority setting in Sub-Saharan Africa should include promoting collaboration as part of their agendas, in order to take advantage of the potential transferability of results and methods of the available health economic analyses in Africa and internationally.

Habitat evaluation of wild Amur tiger (Panthera tigris altaica) and conservation priority setting in north-eastern China.

PubMed

Xiaofeng, Luan; Yi, Qu; Diqiang, Li; Shirong, Liu; Xiulei, Wang; Bo, Wu; Chunquan, Zhu

2011-01-01

The Amur Tiger (Panthera tigris altaica) is one of the world's most endangered species. Recently, habitat fragmentation, food scarcity and human hunting have drastically reduced the population size and distribution areas of Amur tigers in the wild, leaving them on the verge of extinction. Presently, they are only found in the north-eastern part of China. In this study, we developed a reference framework using methods and technologies of analytic hierarchy process (AHP), remote sensing (RS), geographic information system (GIS), GAP analysis and Natural Break (Jenks) classification to evaluate the habitat and to set the conservation priorities for Amur tigers in eastern areas of Heilongjiang and Jilin Provinces of northeast China. We proposed a Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) incorporating 7 factors covering natural conditions and human disturbance. Based on the HSI values, the suitability was classified into five levels from the most to not suitable. Finally, according to results of GAP analysis, we identified six conservation priorities and designed a conservation landscape incorporating four new nature reserves, enlarging two existing ones, and creating four linkages for Amur tigers in northeast China. The case study showed that the core habitats (the most suitable and highly suitable habitats) identified for Amur tigers covered 35,547 km(2), accounting for approximately 26.71% of the total study area (1,33,093 km(2)). However, existing nature reserves protected only (7124 km(2) or) 20.04% of the identified core habitats. Thus, enlargement of current reserves is necessary and urgent for the tiger's conservation and restoration. Moreover, the establishment of wildlife corridors linking core habitats will provide an efficient reserve network for tiger conservation to maintain the evolutionary potential of Amur tigers facing environmental changes. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

37 CFR 41.202 - Suggesting an interference.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... examiner sets will operate as a concession of priority for the subject matter of the claim. If the...(a), (4) Explain in detail why the applicant will prevail on priority, (5) If a claim has been added... this section. The claim the examiner proposes to have added must, apart from the question of priority...

Identifying priorities to improve paediatric in-hospital antimicrobial use by cross-sectional evaluation of prevalence and appropriateness of prescription.

PubMed

Goycochea-Valdivia, Walter Alfredo; Moreno-Ramos, Francisco; Paño-Pardo, José Ramón; Aracil-Santos, Francisco Javier; Baquero-Artigao, Fernando; Del Rosal-Rabes, Teresa; Mellado-Peña, María José; Escosa-García, Luis

2017-11-01

Information about paediatric in-hospital antimicrobial usage and prescribing patterns to guide improvement strategies is scant. We aim to use an evaluation of the prevalence and appropriateness of antimicrobial prescription to identify antimicrobial stewardship priorities in children. A cross-sectional point study was performed on hospitalised paediatric patients in a Spanish tertiary hospital, assessing the prevalence of antimicrobial prescription (PAP) and appropriateness of antimicrobial prescription (AAP). AAP was defined as a correct indication plus an appropriate prescribing pattern (dose, spectrum and interval). Evaluation was performed using established antimicrobial guidelines. Other factors that may have a bearing on antimicrobial prescription were also analysed. A total of 171 patients were included. PAP was 49.7% (85/171) and AAP was 60.9% (91/161). The most common indications for antimicrobial use were antimicrobial prophylaxis (28.3%, 32/113) and pneumonia (8.2%, 8/113). Overall, 161 antimicrobials were prescribed (1.9 antimicrobials per patient): 55.3% (89/161) were empiric, 16.1% (26/161) were targeted and 28.6% (46/161) were prophylactic. Amoxicillin/clavulanate (8.2%, 14/171) and sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim (8.2%, 14/171) were the most prescribed antimicrobials. The prescription of antifungals (11.7%, 20/171) and antivirals (1.8%, 3/171) was analysed. Major causes of inappropriate antibiotic use were prolonged prescriptions (21.7%, 35/161) and use of agents with an excessively broad coverage spectrum (21.1%, 34/161). PAP and AAP varied between wards and antimicrobials. Measurement of PAP and AAP offers valuable information for detecting priorities in hospital settings and monitoring antimicrobial usage prior to the development of antimicrobial stewardship programmes. In our setting, the main areas for improvement are duration of therapy and proper use of broad-spectrum antimicrobials. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier España, S.L.U. and Sociedad Española de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica. All rights reserved.

Chartered Society of Physiotherapy's identification of national research priorities for physiotherapy using a modified Delphi technique.

PubMed

Rankin, Gabrielle; Rushton, Alison; Olver, Pat; Moore, Ann

2012-09-01

To define research priorities to strategically inform the evidence base for physiotherapy practice. A modified Delphi method using SurveyMonkey software identified priorities for physiotherapy research through national consensus. An iterative process of three rounds provided feedback. Round 1 requested five priorities using pre-defined prioritisation criteria. Content analysis identified research themes and topics. Round 2 requested rating of the importance of the research topics using a 1-5 Likert scale. Round 3 requested a further process of rating. Quantitative and qualitative data informed decision-making. Level of consensus was established as mean rating ≥ 3.5, coefficient of variation ≤ 30%, and ≥ 55% agreement. Consensus across participants was evaluated using Kendall's W. Four expert panels (n=40-61) encompassing a range of stakeholders and reflecting four core areas of physiotherapy practice were established by steering groups (n=204 participants overall). Response rates of 53-78% across three rounds were good. The identification of 24/185 topics for musculoskeletal, 43/174 for neurology, 30/120 for cardiorespiratory and medical rehabilitation, and 30/113 for mental and physical health and wellbeing as priorities demonstrated discrimination of the process. Consensus between participants was good for most topics. Measurement validity of the research topics was good. The involvement of multiple stakeholders as participants ensured the current context of the intended use of the priorities. From a process of national consensus involving key stakeholders, including service users, physiotherapy research topics have been identified and prioritised. Setting priorities provides a vision of how research can contribute to the developing research base in physiotherapy to maximise focus. Copyright © 2012 Chartered Society of Physiotherapy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

42 CFR 494.110 - Condition: Quality assessment and performance improvement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... time. (c) Standard: Prioritizing improvement activities. The dialysis facility must set priorities for performance improvement, considering prevalence and severity of identified problems and giving priority to...

Global Health and Emergency Care: Defining Clinical Research Priorities.

PubMed

Hansoti, Bhakti; Aluisio, Adam R; Barry, Meagan A; Davey, Kevin; Lentz, Brian A; Modi, Payal; Newberry, Jennifer A; Patel, Melissa H; Smith, Tricia A; Vinograd, Alexandra M; Levine, Adam C

2017-06-01

Despite recent strides in the development of global emergency medicine (EM), the field continues to lag in applying a scientific approach to identifying critical knowledge gaps and advancing evidence-based solutions to clinical and public health problems seen in emergency departments (EDs) worldwide. Here, progress on the global EM research agenda created at the 2013 Academic Emergency Medicine Global Health and Emergency Care Consensus Conference is evaluated and critical areas for future development in emergency care research internationally are identified. A retrospective review of all studies compiled in the Global Emergency Medicine Literature Review (GEMLR) database from 2013 through 2015 was conducted. Articles were categorized and analyzed using descriptive quantitative measures and structured data matrices. The Global Emergency Medicine Think Tank Clinical Research Working Group at the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine 2016 Annual Meeting then further conceptualized and defined global EM research priorities utilizing consensus-based decision making. Research trends in global EM research published between 2013 and 2015 show a predominance of observational studies relative to interventional or descriptive studies, with the majority of research conducted in the inpatient setting in comparison to the ED or prehospital setting. Studies on communicable diseases and injury were the most prevalent, with a relative dearth of research on chronic noncommunicable diseases. The Global Emergency Medicine Think Tank Clinical Research Working Group identified conceptual frameworks to define high-impact research priorities, including the traditional approach of using global burden of disease to define priorities and the impact of EM on individual clinical care and public health opportunities. EM research is also described through a population lens approach, including gender, pediatrics, and migrant and refugee health. Despite recent strides in global EM research and a proliferation of scholarly output in the field, further work is required to advocate for and inform research priorities in global EM. The priorities outlined in this paper aim to guide future research in the field, with the goal of advancing the development of EM worldwide. © 2017 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

Optimizing farm landscape by two decision-support tools for present and future: A case study in a mountainous farm of Taiwan

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Chou, S.; Lin, Y.

2013-12-01

Rapid expansion of agricultural land-use has been identified as the main factor degrading biodiversity. Many studies have indicated that habitat quality and connectivity for multiple species can be preserved by applying the systematic conservation planning and software programs for spatial conservation prioritizations are usually used by planners to solve conservation problems for present and future. However, each conservation software program uses different algorithms and may not be suitable or efficient for all case studies. Therefore, in this study we compared the performance of two commonly used decision-support tools, Marxan and Zonation, on identifying priority areas as reserve region for 16 bird species in the mountain area of Taiwan. The priority areas are considered as the results of the tradeoff between bird presence (biological factor) and agricultural products (economic factor). Marxan uses the minimum set approach to identify priority areas for meeting specific targets while Zonation uses the maximum coverage approach to identify priority areas given a fixed budget. Therefore, we design the scenario with the most comparable setting, which selects target-based planning as the removal rule and boundary length penalty option in zonation. The landscape composition and configuration of the simulated priority areas were further evaluated by using landscape metrics and their similarity were examined by using Spearman's rank tests. The results showed that Marxan performed more efficiently while Zonation generated the priority areas in better connectivity. As the selection of conservation programs depends on users objectives and needs for present and future, this study provides useful information on determining suitable and efficient decision-support tools for future bird conservation. Conservation maps for Zonation based on different BLP parameter. The conservation value for Zonation is based on the hierarchical solution output. (a)BLP =1000 (b)BLP =3000 (c)BLP =5000 (d)BLP =7000 Conservation maps for Marxan based on different BMP parameter. The conservation value for Marxan is based on the selection frequency. (a)BMP =2500 (b)BMP =5000 (c)BMP =7500 (d)BMP =10000

Priority Setting for Improvement of Cervical Cancer Prevention in Iran.

PubMed

Majidi, Azam; Ghiasvand, Reza; Hadji, Maryam; Nahvijou, Azin; Mousavi, Azam-Sadat; Pakgohar, Minoo; Khodakarami, Nahid; Abedini, Mehrandokht; Amouzegar Hashemi, Farnaz; Rahnamaye Farzami, Marjan; Shahsiah, Reza; Sajedinejhad, Sima; Mohagheghi, Mohammad Ali; Nadali, Fatemeh; Rashidian, Arash; Weiderpass, Elisabete; Mogensen, Ole; Zendehdel, Kazem

2015-11-22

Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer among women worldwide. Organized cervical screening and vaccination against human papilloma virus (HPV) have been successful interventions for prevention of invasive cervical cancer (ICC). Because of cultural and religious considerations, ICC has low incidence in Iran and many other Muslim countries. There is no organized cervical screening in these countries. Therefore, ICC is usually diagnosed in advanced stages with poor prognosis in these countries. We performed a priority setting exercise and suggested priorities for prevention of ICC in this setting. We invited experts and researchers to a workshop and asked them to list important suggestions for ICC prevention in Iran. After merging similar items and removing the duplicates, we asked the experts to rank the list of suggested items. We used a strategy grid and Go-zone analysis to determine final list of priorities for ICC prevention in Iran. From 26 final items suggested as priorities for prevention of ICC, the most important priorities were developing national guidelines for cervical screening and quality control protocol for patient follow-up and management of precancerous lesions. In addition, we emphasized considering insurance coverage for cervical screening, public awareness, and research priorities, and establishment of a cervical screening registry. A comprehensive approach and implementation of organized cervical screening program is necessary for prevention of ICC in Iran and other low incidence Muslim countries. Because of high cost for vaccination and low incidence of cervical cancer, we do not recommend HPV vaccination for the time being in Iran. © 2016 by Kerman University of Medical Sciences.

Priority Setting for Improvement of Cervical Cancer Prevention in Iran

PubMed Central

Majidi, Azam; Ghiasvand, Reza; Hadji, Maryam; Nahvijou, Azin; Mousavi, Azam-Sadat; Pakgohar, Minoo; Khodakarami, Nahid; Abedini, Mehrandokht; Amouzegar Hashemi, Farnaz; Rahnamaye Farzami, Marjan; Shahsiah, Reza; Sajedinejhad, Sima; Mohagheghi, Mohammad Ali; Nadali, Fatemeh; Rashidian, Arash; Weiderpass, Elisabete; Mogensen, Ole; Zendehdel, Kazem

2016-01-01

Background: Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer among women worldwide. Organized cervical screening and vaccination against human papilloma virus (HPV) have been successful interventions for prevention of invasive cervical cancer (ICC). Because of cultural and religious considerations, ICC has low incidence in Iran and many other Muslim countries. There is no organized cervical screening in these countries. Therefore, ICC is usually diagnosed in advanced stages with poor prognosis in these countries. We performed a priority setting exercise and suggested priorities for prevention of ICC in this setting. Methods: We invited experts and researchers to a workshop and asked them to list important suggestions for ICC prevention in Iran. After merging similar items and removing the duplicates, we asked the experts to rank the list of suggested items. We used a strategy grid and Go-zone analysis to determine final list of priorities for ICC prevention in Iran. Results: From 26 final items suggested as priorities for prevention of ICC, the most important priorities were developing national guidelines for cervical screening and quality control protocol for patient follow-up and management of precancerous lesions. In addition, we emphasized considering insurance coverage for cervical screening, public awareness, and research priorities, and establishment of a cervical screening registry. Conclusion: A comprehensive approach and implementation of organized cervical screening program is necessary for prevention of ICC in Iran and other low incidence Muslim countries. Because of high cost for vaccination and low incidence of cervical cancer, we do not recommend HPV vaccination for the time being in Iran. PMID:27239863

Solidarity and cost management: Swiss citizens' reasons for priorities regarding health insurance coverage.

PubMed

Schindler, Mélinée; Danis, Marion; Goold, Susan D; Hurst, Samia A

2018-04-14

Approaches to priority-setting for scarce resources have shifted to public deliberation as trade-offs become more difficult. We report results of a qualitative analysis of public deliberation in Switzerland, a country with high health-care costs, an individual health insurance mandate and a strong tradition of direct democracy with frequent votes related to health care. We adapted the Choosing Healthplans All Together (CHAT) tool, an exercise developed to transform complex health-care allocation decisions into easily understandable choices, for use in Switzerland. We conducted focus groups in twelve Swiss cities, recruiting from a range of socio-economic backgrounds in the three language regions. Participants developed strategic arguments based on the importance of basic coverage for all, and of cost-benefit evaluation. They also expressed arguments relying on a principle of solidarity, in particular the importance of protection for vulnerable groups, and on the importance of medical care. They struggled with the place of personal responsibility in coverage decisions. In commenting on the exercise, participants found the degree of consensus despite differing opinions surprising and valuable. The Swiss population is particularly attentive to the costs of health care and means of reducing these costs. Swiss citizens are capable of making trade-offs and setting priorities for complex health issues. © 2018 The Authors Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Setting Priorities for Graduate Medical Education,

DTIC Science & Technology

1996-02-01

assist the work of these staffs. 14. SUBJECT TERMS Attrition, data bases, education , mathematical models, medical personnel, military medicine, naval...CRM 95-209 / February 1996 Setting Priorities for Graduate Medical Education Neil B. Carey • Marjorie D. Curia • Oliver A. Smith 19960718 027...the tirae for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources gathering and maintaining the data needed, and reviewing the collection of

City and County Solar PV Training Program, Module 1: Goal Setting and Clarification

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

McLaren, Joyce A.

This module will help attendees understand nuances between different types of renewable energy goals, the importance of terminology when setting and announcing goals, the value of formally clarifying priorities, and how priorities may impact procurement options. It is the first training in a series intended to help municipal staff procure solar PV for their land and buildings.

How Do Development Assistance Partners Conceptualise and Prioritise Evidence in Priority Setting (PS) for Health Programmes Relevant to Low Income Countries? A Qualitative Study

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Kapiriri, Lydia; Sinding, Christina; Arnold, Emmy

2017-01-01

There is limited literature on how donors conceptualise and prioritise evidence in healthcare priority setting (PS) affecting low income countries (LICs). We interviewed 35 donors and reviewed their websites to describe how they conceptualise, prioritise and perceive the role evidence plays in their organisation's healthcare prioritisation…

Priority setting and evidence based purchasing.

PubMed

Frith, L

1999-01-01

The purpose of this paper is to consider the role that values play in priority setting through the use of EBP. It is important to be clear about the role of values at all levels of the decision making process. At one level, society as a whole has to make decisions about the kind of health provision that it wants. As is generally accepted, these priority setting questions cannot be answered by medical science alone but involve important judgements of value. However, as I hope to show values come into priority setting questions at another level, one not often explicitly recognised in much of the literature: that of the very definition of the effectiveness of treatments. This has important consequences for patient care. If we do not recognise that the effectiveness of a treatment involve subjective elements--a patient's own assessment of the value of the treatment--then this could lead to the belief that we can purchase one treatment that is the most effective for all patients. This might result in a detrimental reduction in the range of options that a patient is given with some patients not receiving the treatment that is most effective for them.

Perspectives of Patients, Caregivers and Researchers on Research Priorities in Donation and Transplantation in Canada: A Pilot Workshop

PubMed Central

Allard, Julie; Durand, Céline; Anthony, Samantha J.; Dumez, Vincent; Hartell, David; Hébert, Marie-Josée; West, Lori J.; Wright, Linda; Fortin, Marie-Chantal

2017-01-01

Background It is vitally important to seek input from key stakeholders to increase the quality and relevance of health-related research and accelerate its adoption into practice. Patients and caregivers have rarely been involved in setting research priorities in the transplantation and donation field. The objectives of this explorative study are: (i) to discuss research priorities within the Canadian National Transplant Research Program during a priority-setting exercise with patients, caregivers, organ donors and researchers and (ii) to compare the identified priorities with research published in 2 prestigious transplantation journals. Methods A pilot workshop attended by 10 patients and caregivers and 5 researchers was held in Montréal (Quebec, Canada) in August 2014 to identify research priorities. Priorities were identified using a thematic analysis of the workshop transcription conducted by multiple coders. These priorities were compared with the topics of research articles published in 2 major transplantation journals between 2012 and 2014. Results The themes of the 10 research priorities identified by study participants were related to different research domains: social, cultural, and environmental health factors (4); biomedical or clinical (4); and research about health systems and services (2). 26.7% of the research articles published were related to the identified priorities. Thirteen percent looked at ways to improve graft survival and 8.5% looked at the development of tolerance, 2 priorities identified by participants. Fewer than 5% examined the other 8 research priorities identified as important by workshop participants. Conclusions This is the first study reporting patients' and researchers' priorities in the field of transplantation and donation in Canada. There is a discrepancy between topics that key stakeholders find important and research published in 2 major transplantation journals. The research priorities identified during our initial workshop will be validated through a national survey and workshop. PMID:28361111

Translational Educational Research

PubMed Central

Issenberg, S. Barry; Cohen, Elaine R.; Barsuk, Jeffrey H.; Wayne, Diane B.

2012-01-01

Medical education research contributes to translational science (TS) when its outcomes not only impact educational settings, but also downstream results, including better patient-care practices and improved patient outcomes. Simulation-based medical education (SBME) has demonstrated its role in achieving such distal results. Effective TS also encompasses implementation science, the science of health-care delivery. Educational, clinical, quality, and safety goals can only be achieved by thematic, sustained, and cumulative research programs, not isolated studies. Components of an SBME TS research program include motivated learners, curriculum grounded in evidence-based learning theory, educational resources, evaluation of downstream results, a productive research team, rigorous research methods, research resources, and health-care system acceptance and implementation. National research priorities are served from translational educational research. National funding priorities should endorse the contribution and value of translational education research. PMID:23138127

Evaluation of concurrent priority queue algorithms. Technical report

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Huang, Q.

1991-02-01

The priority queue is a fundamental data structure that is used in a large variety of parallel algorithms, such as multiprocessor scheduling and parallel best-first search of state-space graphs. This thesis addresses the design and experimental evaluation of two novel concurrent priority queues: a parallel Fibonacci heap and a concurrent priority pool, and compares them with the concurrent binary heap. The parallel Fibonacci heap is based on the sequential Fibonacci heap, which is theoretically the most efficient data structure for sequential priority queues. This scheme not only preserves the efficient operation time bounds of its sequential counterpart, but also hasmore » very low contention by distributing locks over the entire data structure. The experimental results show its linearly scalable throughput and speedup up to as many processors as tested (currently 18). A concurrent access scheme for a doubly linked list is described as part of the implementation of the parallel Fibonacci heap. The concurrent priority pool is based on the concurrent B-tree and the concurrent pool. The concurrent priority pool has the highest throughput among the priority queues studied. Like the parallel Fibonacci heap, the concurrent priority pool scales linearly up to as many processors as tested. The priority queues are evaluated in terms of throughput and speedup. Some applications of concurrent priority queues such as the vertex cover problem and the single source shortest path problem are tested.« less

42 CFR 403.732 - Condition of participation: Quality assessment and performance improvement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... performance improvement program. (3) The RNHCI must set priorities for performance improvement, considering... assessment and performance improvement program addresses identified priorities in the RNHCI and are...

Setting research priorities to improve global newborn health and prevent stillbirths by 2025

PubMed Central

Yoshida, Sachiyo; Martines, José; Lawn, Joy E; Wall, Stephen; Souza, Joăo Paulo; Rudan, Igor; Cousens, Simon; Aaby, Peter; Adam, Ishag; Adhikari, Ramesh Kant; Ambalavanan, Namasivayam; Arifeen, Shams EI; Aryal, Dhana Raj; Asiruddin, Sk; Baqui, Abdullah; Barros, Aluisio JD; Benn, Christine S; Bhandari, Vineet; Bhatnagar, Shinjini; Bhattacharya, Sohinee; Bhutta, Zulfiqar A; Black, Robert E; Blencowe, Hannah; Bose, Carl; Brown, Justin; Bührer, Christoph; Carlo, Wally; Cecatti, Jose Guilherme; Cheung, Po–Yin; Clark, Robert; Colbourn, Tim; Conde–Agudelo, Agustin; Corbett, Erica; Czeizel, Andrew E; Das, Abhik; Day, Louise Tina; Deal, Carolyn; Deorari, Ashok; Dilmen, Uğur; English, Mike; Engmann, Cyril; Esamai, Fabian; Fall, Caroline; Ferriero, Donna M; Gisore, Peter; Hazir, Tabish; Higgins, Rosemary D; Homer, Caroline SE; Hoque, DE; Irgens, Lorentz; Islam, MT; de Graft–Johnson, Joseph; Joshua, Martias Alice; Keenan, William; Khatoon, Soofia; Kieler, Helle; Kramer, Michael S; Lackritz, Eve M; Lavender, Tina; Lawintono, Laurensia; Luhanga, Richard; Marsh, David; McMillan, Douglas; McNamara, Patrick J; Mol, Ben Willem J; Molyneux, Elizabeth; Mukasa, G. K; Mutabazi, Miriam; Nacul, Luis Carlos; Nakakeeto, Margaret; Narayanan, Indira; Olusanya, Bolajoko; Osrin, David; Paul, Vinod; Poets, Christian; Reddy, Uma M; Santosham, Mathuram; Sayed, Rubayet; Schlabritz–Loutsevitch, Natalia E; Singhal, Nalini; Smith, Mary Alice; Smith, Peter G; Soofi, Sajid; Spong, Catherine Y; Sultana, Shahin; Tshefu, Antoinette; van Bel, Frank; Gray, Lauren Vestewig; Waiswa, Peter; Wang, Wei; Williams, Sarah LA; Wright, Linda; Zaidi, Anita; Zhang, Yanfeng; Zhong, Nanbert; Zuniga, Isabel; Bahl, Rajiv

2016-01-01

Background In 2013, an estimated 2.8 million newborns died and 2.7 million were stillborn. A much greater number suffer from long term impairment associated with preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, congenital anomalies, and perinatal or infectious causes. With the approaching deadline for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2015, there was a need to set the new research priorities on newborns and stillbirth with a focus not only on survival but also on health, growth and development. We therefore carried out a systematic exercise to set newborn health research priorities for 2013–2025. Methods We used adapted Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methods for this prioritization exercise. We identified and approached the 200 most productive researchers and 400 program experts, and 132 of them submitted research questions online. These were collated into a set of 205 research questions, sent for scoring to the 600 identified experts, and were assessed and scored by 91 experts. Results Nine out of top ten identified priorities were in the domain of research on improving delivery of known interventions, with simplified neonatal resuscitation program and clinical algorithms and improved skills of community health workers leading the list. The top 10 priorities in the domain of development were led by ideas on improved Kangaroo Mother Care at community level, how to improve the accuracy of diagnosis by community health workers, and perinatal audits. The 10 leading priorities for discovery research focused on stable surfactant with novel modes of administration for preterm babies, ability to diagnose fetal distress and novel tocolytic agents to delay or stop preterm labour. Conclusion These findings will assist both donors and researchers in supporting and conducting research to close the knowledge gaps for reducing neonatal mortality, morbidity and long term impairment. WHO, SNL and other partners will work to generate interest among key national stakeholders, governments, NGOs, and research institutes in these priorities, while encouraging research funders to support them. We will track research funding, relevant requests for proposals and trial registers to monitor if the priorities identified by this exercise are being addressed. PMID:26401272

Setting research priorities to improve global newborn health and prevent stillbirths by 2025.

PubMed

Yoshida, Sachiyo; Martines, José; Lawn, Joy E; Wall, Stephen; Souza, Joăo Paulo; Rudan, Igor; Cousens, Simon; Aaby, Peter; Adam, Ishag; Adhikari, Ramesh Kant; Ambalavanan, Namasivayam; Arifeen, Shams Ei; Aryal, Dhana Raj; Asiruddin, Sk; Baqui, Abdullah; Barros, Aluisio Jd; Benn, Christine S; Bhandari, Vineet; Bhatnagar, Shinjini; Bhattacharya, Sohinee; Bhutta, Zulfiqar A; Black, Robert E; Blencowe, Hannah; Bose, Carl; Brown, Justin; Bührer, Christoph; Carlo, Wally; Cecatti, Jose Guilherme; Cheung, Po-Yin; Clark, Robert; Colbourn, Tim; Conde-Agudelo, Agustin; Corbett, Erica; Czeizel, Andrew E; Das, Abhik; Day, Louise Tina; Deal, Carolyn; Deorari, Ashok; Dilmen, Uğur; English, Mike; Engmann, Cyril; Esamai, Fabian; Fall, Caroline; Ferriero, Donna M; Gisore, Peter; Hazir, Tabish; Higgins, Rosemary D; Homer, Caroline Se; Hoque, D E; Irgens, Lorentz; Islam, M T; de Graft-Johnson, Joseph; Joshua, Martias Alice; Keenan, William; Khatoon, Soofia; Kieler, Helle; Kramer, Michael S; Lackritz, Eve M; Lavender, Tina; Lawintono, Laurensia; Luhanga, Richard; Marsh, David; McMillan, Douglas; McNamara, Patrick J; Mol, Ben Willem J; Molyneux, Elizabeth; Mukasa, G K; Mutabazi, Miriam; Nacul, Luis Carlos; Nakakeeto, Margaret; Narayanan, Indira; Olusanya, Bolajoko; Osrin, David; Paul, Vinod; Poets, Christian; Reddy, Uma M; Santosham, Mathuram; Sayed, Rubayet; Schlabritz-Loutsevitch, Natalia E; Singhal, Nalini; Smith, Mary Alice; Smith, Peter G; Soofi, Sajid; Spong, Catherine Y; Sultana, Shahin; Tshefu, Antoinette; van Bel, Frank; Gray, Lauren Vestewig; Waiswa, Peter; Wang, Wei; Williams, Sarah LA; Wright, Linda; Zaidi, Anita; Zhang, Yanfeng; Zhong, Nanbert; Zuniga, Isabel; Bahl, Rajiv

2016-06-01

In 2013, an estimated 2.8 million newborns died and 2.7 million were stillborn. A much greater number suffer from long term impairment associated with preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, congenital anomalies, and perinatal or infectious causes. With the approaching deadline for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2015, there was a need to set the new research priorities on newborns and stillbirth with a focus not only on survival but also on health, growth and development. We therefore carried out a systematic exercise to set newborn health research priorities for 2013-2025. We used adapted Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methods for this prioritization exercise. We identified and approached the 200 most productive researchers and 400 program experts, and 132 of them submitted research questions online. These were collated into a set of 205 research questions, sent for scoring to the 600 identified experts, and were assessed and scored by 91 experts. Nine out of top ten identified priorities were in the domain of research on improving delivery of known interventions, with simplified neonatal resuscitation program and clinical algorithms and improved skills of community health workers leading the list. The top 10 priorities in the domain of development were led by ideas on improved Kangaroo Mother Care at community level, how to improve the accuracy of diagnosis by community health workers, and perinatal audits. The 10 leading priorities for discovery research focused on stable surfactant with novel modes of administration for preterm babies, ability to diagnose fetal distress and novel tocolytic agents to delay or stop preterm labour. These findings will assist both donors and researchers in supporting and conducting research to close the knowledge gaps for reducing neonatal mortality, morbidity and long term impairment. WHO, SNL and other partners will work to generate interest among key national stakeholders, governments, NGOs, and research institutes in these priorities, while encouraging research funders to support them. We will track research funding, relevant requests for proposals and trial registers to monitor if the priorities identified by this exercise are being addressed.

Engaging patients in health research: identifying research priorities through community town halls.

PubMed

Etchegary, Holly; Bishop, Lisa; Street, Catherine; Aubrey-Bassler, Kris; Humphries, Dale; Vat, Lidewij Eva; Barrett, Brendan

2017-03-11

The vision of Canada's Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research is that patients be actively engaged as partners in health research. Support units have been created across Canada to build capacity in patient-oriented research and facilitate its conduct. This study aimed to explore patients' health research priorities in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador (NL). Eight town halls were held with members of the general public in rural and urban settings across the province. Sessions were a hybrid information-consultation event, with key questions about health research priorities and outcomes guiding the discussion. Sixty eight members of the public attended town hall sessions. A broad range of health experiences in the healthcare system were recounted. Key priorities for the public included access and availability of providers and services, disease prevention and health promotion, and follow-up support and community care. In discussing their health research priorities, participants spontaneously raised a broad range of suggestions for improving the healthcare system in our jurisdiction. Public research priorities and suggestions for improving the provision of healthcare provide valuable information to guide Support Units' planning and priority-setting processes. A range of research areas were raised as priorities for patients that are likely comparable to other healthcare systems. These create a number of health research questions that would be in line with public priorities. Findings also provide lessons learned for others and add to the evidence base on patient engagement methods.

Factors explaining priority setting at community mental health centres: a quantitative analysis of referral assessments.

PubMed

Grepperud, Sverre; Holman, Per Arne; Wangen, Knut Reidar

2014-12-14

Clinicians at Norwegian community mental health centres assess referrals from general practitioners and classify them into three priority groups (high priority, low priority, and refusal) according to need where need is defined by three prioritization criteria (severity, effect, and cost-effectiveness). In this study, we seek to operationalize the three criteria and analyze to what extent they have an effect on clinical-level priority setting after controlling for clinician characteristics and organisational factors. Twenty anonymous referrals were rated by 42 admission team members employed at 14 community mental health centres in the South-East Health Region of Norway. Intra-class correlation coefficients were calculated and logistic regressions were performed. Variation in clinicians' assessments of the three criteria was highest for effect and cost-effectiveness. An ordered logistic regression model showed that all three criteria for prioritization, three clinician characteristics (education, being a manager or not, and "guideline awareness"), and the centres themselves (fixed effects), explained priority decisions. The relative importance of the explanatory factors, however, depended on the priority decision studied. For the classification of all admitted patients into high- and low-priority groups, all clinician characteristics became insignificant. For the classification of patients, into those admitted and non-admitted, one criterion (effect) and "being a manager or not" became insignificant, while profession ("being a psychiatrist") became significant. Our findings suggest that variation in priority decisions can be reduced by: (i) reducing the disagreement in clinicians' assessments of cost-effectiveness and effect, and (ii) restricting priority decisions to clinicians with a similar background (education, being a manager or not, and "guideline awareness").

Empowering districts to target priorities for improving child health service in Uganda using change management and rapid assessment methods.

PubMed

Odaga, John; Henriksson, Dorcus K; Nkolo, Charles; Tibeihaho, Hector; Musabe, Richard; Katusiime, Margaret; Sinabulya, Zaccheus; Mucunguzi, Stephen; Mbonye, Anthony K; Valadez, Joseph J

2016-01-01

Local health system managers in low- and middle-income countries have the responsibility to set health priorities and allocate resources accordingly. Although tools exist to aid this process, they are not widely applied for various reasons including non-availability, poor knowledge of the tools, and poor adaptability into the local context. In Uganda, delivery of basic services is devolved to the District Local Governments through the District Health Teams (DHTs). The Community and District Empowerment for Scale-up (CODES) project aims to provide a set of management tools that aid contextualised priority setting, fund allocation, and problem-solving in a systematic way to improve effective coverage and quality of child survival interventions. Although the various tools have previously been used at the national level, the project aims to combine them in an integral way for implementation at the district level. These tools include Lot Quality Assurance Sampling (LQAS) surveys to generate local evidence, Bottleneck analysis and Causal analysis as analytical tools, Continuous Quality Improvement, and Community Dialogues based on Citizen Report Cards and U reports. The tools enable identification of gaps, prioritisation of possible solutions, and allocation of resources accordingly. This paper presents some of the tools used by the project in five districts in Uganda during the proof-of-concept phase of the project. All five districts were trained and participated in LQAS surveys and readily adopted the tools for priority setting and resource allocation. All districts developed health operational work plans, which were based on the evidence and each of the districts implemented more than three of the priority activities which were included in their work plans. In the five districts, the CODES project demonstrated that DHTs can adopt and integrate these tools in the planning process by systematically identifying gaps and setting priority interventions for child survival.

Empowering districts to target priorities for improving child health service in Uganda using change management and rapid assessment methods

PubMed Central

Odaga, John; Henriksson, Dorcus K.; Nkolo, Charles; Tibeihaho, Hector; Musabe, Richard; Katusiime, Margaret; Sinabulya, Zaccheus; Mucunguzi, Stephen; Mbonye, Anthony K.; Valadez, Joseph J.

2016-01-01

Background Local health system managers in low- and middle-income countries have the responsibility to set health priorities and allocate resources accordingly. Although tools exist to aid this process, they are not widely applied for various reasons including non-availability, poor knowledge of the tools, and poor adaptability into the local context. In Uganda, delivery of basic services is devolved to the District Local Governments through the District Health Teams (DHTs). The Community and District Empowerment for Scale-up (CODES) project aims to provide a set of management tools that aid contextualised priority setting, fund allocation, and problem-solving in a systematic way to improve effective coverage and quality of child survival interventions. Design Although the various tools have previously been used at the national level, the project aims to combine them in an integral way for implementation at the district level. These tools include Lot Quality Assurance Sampling (LQAS) surveys to generate local evidence, Bottleneck analysis and Causal analysis as analytical tools, Continuous Quality Improvement, and Community Dialogues based on Citizen Report Cards and U reports. The tools enable identification of gaps, prioritisation of possible solutions, and allocation of resources accordingly. This paper presents some of the tools used by the project in five districts in Uganda during the proof-of-concept phase of the project. Results All five districts were trained and participated in LQAS surveys and readily adopted the tools for priority setting and resource allocation. All districts developed health operational work plans, which were based on the evidence and each of the districts implemented more than three of the priority activities which were included in their work plans. Conclusions In the five districts, the CODES project demonstrated that DHTs can adopt and integrate these tools in the planning process by systematically identifying gaps and setting priority interventions for child survival. PMID:27225791

CRIMALDDI: a co-ordinated, rational, and integrated effort to set logical priorities in anti-malarial drug discovery initiatives

PubMed Central

2010-01-01

Despite increasing efforts and support for anti-malarial drug R&D, globally anti-malarial drug discovery and development remains largely uncoordinated and fragmented. The current window of opportunity for large scale funding of R&D into malaria is likely to narrow in the coming decade due to a contraction in available resources caused by the current economic difficulties and new priorities (e.g. climate change). It is, therefore, essential that stakeholders are given well-articulated action plans and priorities to guide judgments on where resources can be best targeted. The CRIMALDDI Consortium (a European Union funded initiative) has been set up to develop, through a process of stakeholder and expert consultations, such priorities and recommendations to address them. It is hoped that the recommendations will help to guide the priorities of the European anti-malarial research as well as the wider global discovery agenda in the coming decade. PMID:20626844

Top 40 priorities for science to inform conservation and management policy in the United States

USGS Publications Warehouse

Fleishman, Erica; Blockstein, David E.; Hall, John A.; Mascia, Michael B.; Rudd, Murray A.; Scott, J. Michael; Sutherland, William J.; Bartuska, Ann M.; Brown, A. Gordon; Christen, Catherine A.; Clement, Joel P.; DellaSala, Dominick; Duke, Clifford D.; Fiske, Shirley J.; Gosnell, Hannah; Haney, J. Christopher; Hutchins, Michael; Klein, Mary L.; Marqusee, Jeffrey; Noon, Barry R.; Nordgren, John R.; Orbuch, Paul M.; Powell, Jimmie; Quarles, Steven P.; Saterson, Kathryn A.; Stein, Bruce A.; Webster, Michael S.; Vedder, Amy

2011-01-01

To maximize the utility of research to decisionmaking, especially given limited financial resources, scientists must set priorities for their efforts. We present a list of the top 40 high-priority, multidisciplinary research questions directed toward informing some of the most important current and future decisions about management of species, communities, and ecological processes in the United States. The questions were generated by an open, inclusive process that included personal interviews with decisionmakers, broad solicitation of research needs from scientists and policymakers, and an intensive workshop that included scientifically oriented individuals responsible for managing and developing policy related to natural resources. The process differed from previous efforts to set priorities for conservation research in its focus on the engagement of decisionmakers in addition to researchers. The research priorities emphasized the importance of addressing societal context and exploration of trade-offs among alternative policies and actions, as well as more traditional questions related to ecological processes and functions.

Differences between patients' and clinicians' research priorities from the Anaesthesia and Peri-operative Care Priority Setting Partnership.

PubMed

Boney, O; Nathanson, M H; Grocott, M P W; Metcalf, L

2017-09-01

The James Lind Alliance Anaesthesia and Peri-operative Care Priority Setting Partnership was a recent collaborative venture bringing approximately 2000 patients, carers and clinicians together to agree priorities for future research into anaesthesia and critical care. This secondary analysis compares the research priorities of 303 service users, 1068 clinicians and 325 clinicians with experience as service users. All three groups prioritised research to improve patient safety. Service users prioritised research about improving patient experience, whereas clinicians prioritised research about clinical effectiveness. Clinicians who had experience as service users consistently prioritised research more like clinicians than like service users. Individual research questions about patient experience were more popular with patients and carers than with clinicians in all but one case. We conclude that patients, carers and clinicians prioritise research questions differently. All groups prioritise research into patient safety, but service users also favour research into patient experience, whereas clinicians favour research into clinical effectiveness. © 2017 The Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland.

Establishing Priorities for Oncology Nursing Research: Nurse and Patient Collaboration.

PubMed

Cox, Anna; Arber, Anne; Gallagher, Ann; MacKenzie, Mairead; Ream, Emma

2017-03-01

To obtain consensus on priorities for oncology nursing research in the United Kingdom.
. A three-round online Delphi survey.
. Oncology nurses were invited via the United Kingdom Oncology Nursing Society (UKONS) database. Patient participation was invited through patient organizations.
. 50 oncology nurses and 18 patients.
. Eligible and consenting individuals reported five priorities for oncology nursing research (round 1), rated their level of agreement with them (round 2), and restated and revised their responses in light of the group's responses (round 3). Consensus was defined as 80% agreement.
. Research priorities for oncology nursing as reported by oncology nurses and patients. 
. Consensus was reached on 50 of 107 research priorities. These priorities reflected the entire cancer pathway, from diagnosis to palliative care. Highest agreement was reached within and across groups on the need for research relating to prevention, screening, early diagnosis, and psychological care across the cancer trajectory. Little consensus was reached regarding symptoms and side effects. Some evident divergence existed. Oncology nurses and patients do not necessarily prioritize the same research areas. Prevention, screening, and early diagnosis are of the highest priority for future research among oncology nurses and patients. 
. Patients usually play little part in priority setting for research. This study provided the opportunity for meaningful patient and nurse involvement in setting a research agenda for oncology nursing that is relevant and beneficial to oncology nurses and patients.

76 FR 14362 - Policies To Promote Rural Radio Service and To Streamline Allotment and Assignment Procedures

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-03-16

... set forth in the First R&O, the Priority is premised on the unique ability of Tribes and Tribal... services the Tribal Priority generally operates as a dispositive preference in the application process... Tribal Priority operates as a dispositive preference in the AM commercial and FM NCE application contexts...

Setting Quality Improvement Priorities for Women Receiving Systemic Therapy for Early-Stage Breast Cancer by Using Population-Level Administrative Data.

PubMed

Enright, Katherine A; Taback, Nathan; Powis, Melanie Lynn; Gonzalez, Alejandro; Yun, Lingsong; Sutradhar, Rinku; Trudeau, Maureen E; Booth, Christopher M; Krzyzanowska, Monika K

2017-10-01

Purpose Routine evaluation of quality measures (QMs) can drive improvement in cancer systems by highlighting gaps in care. Targeting quality improvement at QMs that demonstrate substantial variation has the potential to make the largest impact at the population level. We developed an approach that uses both variation in performance and number of patients affected by the QM to set priorities for improving the quality of systemic therapy for women with early-stage breast cancer (EBC). Patients and Methods Patients with EBC diagnosed from 2006 to 2010 in Ontario, Canada, were identified in the Ontario Cancer Registry and linked deterministically to multiple health care databases. Individual QMs within a panel of 15 QMs previously developed to assess the quality of systemic therapy across four domains (access, treatment delivery, toxicity, and safety) were ranked on interinstitutional variation in performance (using interquartile range) and the number of patients who were affected; then the two rankings were averaged for a summative priority ranking. Results We identified 28,427 patients with EBC who were treated at 84 institutions. The use of computerized physician electronic order entry for chemotherapy, emergency room visits or hospitalizations during chemotherapy, and timely receipt of chemotherapy were identified as the QMs that had the largest potential to improve quality of care at a system level within this cohort. Conclusion A simple ranking system based on interinstitutional variation in performance and patient volume can be used to identify high-priority areas for quality improvement from a population perspective. This approach is generalizable to other health care systems that use QMs to drive improvement.

National Rules for Drug–Drug Interactions: Are They Appropriate for Tertiary Hospitals?

PubMed Central

2016-01-01

The application of appropriate rules for drug–drug interactions (DDIs) could substantially reduce the number of adverse drug events. However, current implementations of such rules in tertiary hospitals are problematic as physicians are receiving too many alerts, causing high override rates and alert fatigue. We investigated the potential impact of Korean national DDI rules in a drug utilization review program in terms of their severity coverage and the clinical efficiency of how physicians respond to them. Using lists of high-priority DDIs developed with the support of the U.S. government, we evaluated 706 contraindicated DDI pairs released in May 2015. We evaluated clinical log data from one tertiary hospital and prescription data from two other tertiary hospitals. The measured parameters were national DDI rule coverage for high-priority DDIs, alert override rate, and number of prescription pairs. The coverage rates of national DDI rules were 80% and 3.0% at the class and drug levels, respectively. The analysis of the system log data showed an overall override rate of 79.6%. Only 0.3% of all of the alerts (n = 66) were high-priority DDI rules. These showed a lower override rate of 51.5%, which was much lower than for the overall DDI rules. We also found 342 and 80 unmatched high-priority DDI pairs which were absent in national rules in inpatient orders from the other two hospitals. The national DDI rules are not complete in terms of their coverage of severe DDIs. They also lack clinical efficiency in tertiary settings, suggesting improved systematic approaches are needed. PMID:27822925

Improving health aid for a better planet: The planning, monitoring and evaluation tool (PLANET)

PubMed Central

Sridhar, Devi; Car, Josip; Chopra, Mickey; Campbell, Harry; Woods, Ngaire; Rudan, Igor

2015-01-01

Background International development assistance for health (DAH) quadrupled between 1990 and 2012, from US$ 5.6 billion to US$ 28.1 billion. This generates an increasing need for transparent and replicable tools that could be used to set investment priorities, monitor the distribution of funding in real time, and evaluate the impact of those investments. Methods In this paper we present a methodology that addresses these three challenges. We call this approach PLANET, which stands for planning, monitoring and evaluation tool. Fundamentally, PLANET is based on crowdsourcing approach to obtaining information relevant to deployment of large–scale programs. Information is contributed in real time by a diverse group of participants involved in the program delivery. Findings PLANET relies on real–time information from three levels of participants in large–scale programs: funders, managers and recipients. At each level, information is solicited to assess five key risks that are most relevant to each level of operations. The risks at the level of funders involve systematic neglect of certain areas, focus on donor’s interests over that of program recipients, ineffective co–ordination between donors, questionable mechanisms of delivery and excessive loss of funding to “middle men”. At the level of managers, the risks are corruption, lack of capacity and/or competence, lack of information and /or communication, undue avoidance of governmental structures / preference to non–governmental organizations and exclusion of local expertise. At the level of primary recipients, the risks are corruption, parallel operations / “verticalization”, misalignment with local priorities and lack of community involvement, issues with ethics, equity and/or acceptability, and low likelihood of sustainability beyond the end of the program’s implementation. Interpretation PLANET is intended as an additional tool available to policy–makers to prioritize, monitor and evaluate large–scale development programs. In this, it should complement tools such as LiST (for health care/interventions), EQUIST (for health care/interventions) and CHNRI (for health research), which also rely on information from local experts and on local context to set priorities in a transparent, user–friendly, replicable, quantifiable and specific, algorithmic–like manner. PMID:26322228

Improving health aid for a better planet: The planning, monitoring and evaluation tool (PLANET).

PubMed

Sridhar, Devi; Car, Josip; Chopra, Mickey; Campbell, Harry; Woods, Ngaire; Rudan, Igor

2015-12-01

International development assistance for health (DAH) quadrupled between 1990 and 2012, from US$ 5.6 billion to US$ 28.1 billion. This generates an increasing need for transparent and replicable tools that could be used to set investment priorities, monitor the distribution of funding in real time, and evaluate the impact of those investments. In this paper we present a methodology that addresses these three challenges. We call this approach PLANET, which stands for planning, monitoring and evaluation tool. Fundamentally, PLANET is based on crowdsourcing approach to obtaining information relevant to deployment of large-scale programs. Information is contributed in real time by a diverse group of participants involved in the program delivery. PLANET relies on real-time information from three levels of participants in large-scale programs: funders, managers and recipients. At each level, information is solicited to assess five key risks that are most relevant to each level of operations. The risks at the level of funders involve systematic neglect of certain areas, focus on donor's interests over that of program recipients, ineffective co-ordination between donors, questionable mechanisms of delivery and excessive loss of funding to "middle men". At the level of managers, the risks are corruption, lack of capacity and/or competence, lack of information and /or communication, undue avoidance of governmental structures / preference to non-governmental organizations and exclusion of local expertise. At the level of primary recipients, the risks are corruption, parallel operations / "verticalization", misalignment with local priorities and lack of community involvement, issues with ethics, equity and/or acceptability, and low likelihood of sustainability beyond the end of the program's implementation. PLANET is intended as an additional tool available to policy-makers to prioritize, monitor and evaluate large-scale development programs. In this, it should complement tools such as LiST (for health care/interventions), EQUIST (for health care/interventions) and CHNRI (for health research), which also rely on information from local experts and on local context to set priorities in a transparent, user-friendly, replicable, quantifiable and specific, algorithmic-like manner.

Research Priorities for Economic Analyses of Prevention: Current Issues & Future Directions

PubMed Central

Crowley, D. Max; Hill, Laura Griner; Kuklinski, Margaret R.; Jones, Damon E.

2013-01-01

In response to growing interest in economic analyses of prevention efforts, a diverse group of prevention researchers, economists, and policy analysts convened a scientific panel, on “Research Priorities in Economic Analysis of Prevention” at the 19th annual conference of the Society for Prevention Research. The panel articulated four priorities that, if followed in future research, would make economic analyses of prevention efforts easier to compare and more relevant to policymakers, and community stakeholders. These priorities are: (1) increased standardization of evaluation methods, (2) improved economic valuation of common prevention outcomes, (3) expanded efforts to maximize evaluation generalizability and impact, as well as (4) enhanced transparency and communicability of economic evaluations. In this paper we define three types of economic analyses in prevention, provide context and rationale for these four priorities as well as related sub-priorities, and discuss the challenges inherent in meeting them. PMID:23963624

Cost-of-illness studies.

PubMed

Oderda, Gary M

2003-01-01

Cost-of-illness studies measure the overall economic impact of a disease on society. Such studies are important in setting public health priorities and for economic evaluation of new treatments. These studies should take the societal perspective and include both direct and indirect costs. Often indirect costs exceed direct costs. Comparison of cost-of-illness studies from different countries is difficult because of differences in population, currency, the way health care is provided, and other social and political factors.

Application of automated multispectral analysis to Delaware's coastal vegetation mapping

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Klemas, V.; Daiber, F.; Bartlett, D.; Crichton, O.; Fornes, A.

1973-01-01

A baseline mapping project was undertaken in Delaware's coastal wetlands as a prelude to an evaluation of the relative value of different parcels of marsh and the setting of priorities for use of these marshes. A description of Delaware's wetlands is given and a mapping approach is discussed together with details concerning an automated analysis. The precision and resolution of the analysis was limited primarily by the quality of the imagery used.

Incorporating big data into treatment plan evaluation: Development of statistical DVH metrics and visualization dashboards.

PubMed

Mayo, Charles S; Yao, John; Eisbruch, Avraham; Balter, James M; Litzenberg, Dale W; Matuszak, Martha M; Kessler, Marc L; Weyburn, Grant; Anderson, Carlos J; Owen, Dawn; Jackson, William C; Haken, Randall Ten

2017-01-01

To develop statistical dose-volume histogram (DVH)-based metrics and a visualization method to quantify the comparison of treatment plans with historical experience and among different institutions. The descriptive statistical summary (ie, median, first and third quartiles, and 95% confidence intervals) of volume-normalized DVH curve sets of past experiences was visualized through the creation of statistical DVH plots. Detailed distribution parameters were calculated and stored in JavaScript Object Notation files to facilitate management, including transfer and potential multi-institutional comparisons. In the treatment plan evaluation, structure DVH curves were scored against computed statistical DVHs and weighted experience scores (WESs). Individual, clinically used, DVH-based metrics were integrated into a generalized evaluation metric (GEM) as a priority-weighted sum of normalized incomplete gamma functions. Historical treatment plans for 351 patients with head and neck cancer, 104 with prostate cancer who were treated with conventional fractionation, and 94 with liver cancer who were treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy were analyzed to demonstrate the usage of statistical DVH, WES, and GEM in a plan evaluation. A shareable dashboard plugin was created to display statistical DVHs and integrate GEM and WES scores into a clinical plan evaluation within the treatment planning system. Benchmarking with normal tissue complication probability scores was carried out to compare the behavior of GEM and WES scores. DVH curves from historical treatment plans were characterized and presented, with difficult-to-spare structures (ie, frequently compromised organs at risk) identified. Quantitative evaluations by GEM and/or WES compared favorably with the normal tissue complication probability Lyman-Kutcher-Burman model, transforming a set of discrete threshold-priority limits into a continuous model reflecting physician objectives and historical experience. Statistical DVH offers an easy-to-read, detailed, and comprehensive way to visualize the quantitative comparison with historical experiences and among institutions. WES and GEM metrics offer a flexible means of incorporating discrete threshold-prioritizations and historic context into a set of standardized scoring metrics. Together, they provide a practical approach for incorporating big data into clinical practice for treatment plan evaluations.

Environmental contaminants in food. Volume II-part a: working papers. I. Priority setting of toxic substances for guiding monitoring programs. II. Five case studies of environmental food contamination

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Not Available

This volume contains working papers written for Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) to assist in preparation of the report Environmental Contaminants in Food. The contents include: (1) Priority setting of toxic substances for guiding monitoring programs; and (2) Five case studies of environmental food contamination.

Precision in Setting Cancer Prevention Priorities: Synthesis of Data, Literature, and Expert Opinion.

PubMed

Girschik, Jennifer; Miller, Laura Jean; Addiscott, Tony; Daube, Mike; Katris, Paul; Ransom, David; Slevin, Terry; Threlfall, Tim; Weeramanthri, Tarun Stephen

2017-01-01

Cancer will continue to be a leading cause of ill health and death unless we can capitalize on the potential for 30-40% of these cancers to be prevented. In this light, cancer prevention represents an enormous opportunity for public health, potentially saving much of the pain, anguish, and cost associated with treating cancer. However, there is a challenge for governments, and the wider community, in prioritizing cancer prevention activities, especially given increasing financial constraints. This paper describes a method for identifying cancer prevention priorities. This method synthesizes detailed cancer statistics, expert opinion, and the published literature for the priority setting process. The process contains four steps: assessing the impact of cancer types; identifying cancers with the greatest impact; considering opportunities for prevention; and combining information on impact and preventability. The strength of our approach is that it is straightforward, transparent and reproducible for other settings. Applying this method in Western Australia produced a priority list of seven adult cancers which were identified as having not only the biggest impact on the community but also the best opportunities for prevention. Work conducted in an additional project phase went on to present data on these priority cancers to a public consultation and develop an agenda for action in cancer prevention.

Precision in Setting Cancer Prevention Priorities: Synthesis of Data, Literature, and Expert Opinion

PubMed Central

Girschik, Jennifer; Miller, Laura Jean; Addiscott, Tony; Daube, Mike; Katris, Paul; Ransom, David; Slevin, Terry; Threlfall, Tim; Weeramanthri, Tarun Stephen

2017-01-01

Cancer will continue to be a leading cause of ill health and death unless we can capitalize on the potential for 30–40% of these cancers to be prevented. In this light, cancer prevention represents an enormous opportunity for public health, potentially saving much of the pain, anguish, and cost associated with treating cancer. However, there is a challenge for governments, and the wider community, in prioritizing cancer prevention activities, especially given increasing financial constraints. This paper describes a method for identifying cancer prevention priorities. This method synthesizes detailed cancer statistics, expert opinion, and the published literature for the priority setting process. The process contains four steps: assessing the impact of cancer types; identifying cancers with the greatest impact; considering opportunities for prevention; and combining information on impact and preventability. The strength of our approach is that it is straightforward, transparent and reproducible for other settings. Applying this method in Western Australia produced a priority list of seven adult cancers which were identified as having not only the biggest impact on the community but also the best opportunities for prevention. Work conducted in an additional project phase went on to present data on these priority cancers to a public consultation and develop an agenda for action in cancer prevention. PMID:28634579

Potential High Priority Subaerial Environments for Mars Sample Return

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

iMOST Team; Bishop, J. L.; Horgan, B.; Benning, L. G.; Carrier, B. L.; Hausrath, E. M.; Altieri, F.; Amelin, Y.; Ammannito, E.; Anand, M.; Beaty, D. W.; Borg, L. E.; Boucher, D.; Brucato, J. R.; Busemann, H.; Campbell, K. A.; Czaja, A. D.; Debaille, V.; Des Marais, D. J.; Dixon, M.; Ehlmann, B. L.; Farmer, J. D.; Fernandez-Remolar, D. C.; Fogarty, J.; Glavin, D. P.; Goreva, Y. S.; Grady, M. M.; Hallis, L. J.; Harrington, A. D.; Herd, C. D. K.; Humayun, M.; Kleine, T.; Kleinhenz, J.; Mangold, N.; Mackelprang, R.; Mayhew, L. E.; McCubbin, F. M.; Mccoy, J. T.; McLennan, S. M.; McSween, H. Y.; Moser, D. E.; Moynier, F.; Mustard, J. F.; Niles, P. B.; Ori, G. G.; Raulin, F.; Rettberg, P.; Rucker, M. A.; Schmitz, N.; Sefton-Nash, E.; Sephton, M. A.; Shaheen, R.; Shuster, D. L.; Siljestrom, S.; Smith, C. L.; Spry, J. A.; Steele, A.; Swindle, T. D.; ten Kate, I. L.; Tosca, N. J.; Usui, T.; Van Kranendonk, M. J.; Wadhwa, M.; Weiss, B. P.; Werner, S. C.; Westall, F.; Wheeler, R. M.; Zipfel, J.; Zorzano, M. P.

2018-04-01

The highest priority subaerial environments for Mars Sample Return include subaerial weathering (paleosols, periglacial/glacial, and rock coatings/rinds), wetlands (mineral precipitates, redox environments, and salt ponds), or cold spring settings.

Priority setting in purchasing.

PubMed

Carroll, G

The NHS cannot deliver full comprehensive health care to all the population. In this article the need to define a range of basic health services is emphasized. Agreement on priorities requires ethical, economic and clinical debate.

Palliative care, public health and justice: setting priorities in resource poor countries.

PubMed

Blinderman, Craig

2009-12-01

Many countries have not considered palliative care a public health problem. With limited resources, disease-oriented therapies and prevention measures take priority. In this paper, I intend to describe the moral framework for considering palliative care as a public health priority in resource-poor countries. A distributive theory of justice for health care should consider integrative palliative care as morally required as it contributes to improving normal functioning and preserving opportunities for the individual. For patients requiring terminal care, we are guided less by principles of justice and more by the duty to relieve suffering and society's commitment to protecting the professional's obligation to uphold principles of beneficence, compassion and non-abandonment. A fair deliberation process is necessary to allow these strong moral commitments to serve as reasons when setting priorities in resource poor countries.

Drinking water and health research: a look to the future in the United States and globally.

PubMed

Sobsey, Mark D

2006-01-01

Drinking water supplies continue to be a major source of human disease and death globally because many of them remain unsafe and vulnerable. Greater efforts are needed to address the key issues and questions which influence the provision of safe drinking water. Efforts are needed to re-evaluate and set new and better priorities for drinking water research and practice. More stakeholders need to be included in the processes of identifying key issues and setting priorities for safe drinking water. The overall approach to drinking water research and the provision of safe drinking water needs to become more rational and scientific, and become more visionary and anticipatory of the ever-present and emerging risks to drinking water safety. Collectively, we need to do a better job of making safe water available, accessible and affordable for all. One such approach to safe water for all is household water treatment and safe storage, which is being promoted globally by the World Health Organization and many other stakeholders and partners to reduce the global burden of waterborne disease.

Intelligent Advanced Communications IP Telephony Feasibility for the US Navy - Phase 3

DTIC Science & Technology

2011-03-01

atlanta.example.com CSeq: 1 BYE Content-Length: 0 Figure 2- 4 SIP Message Details 2.6.8 Implementation of Selected Features Below we examine a set of...34.priority" where priority is one of the following values: 0 Routine (lowest priority) 2 Priority 4 Immediate 6 Flash 8 Flash...cm/dial?poolId= 0 &uri=5553002 HTTPC: <-- : 192.168.0.135:8080 /cm/dial?poolId= 0 &uri=5553002 HTTPC: Closed : 192.168.0.135:8080 4

Balancing efficiency, equity and feasibility of HIV treatment in South Africa – development of programmatic guidance

PubMed Central

2013-01-01

South Africa, the country with the largest HIV epidemic worldwide, has been scaling up treatment since 2003 and is rapidly expanding its eligibility criteria. The HIV treatment programme has achieved significant results, and had 1.8 million people on treatment per 2011. Despite these achievements, it is now facing major concerns regarding (i) efficiency: alternative treatment policies may save more lives for the same budget; (ii) equity: there are large inequalities in who receives treatment; (iii) feasibility: still only 52% of the eligible population receives treatment. Hence, decisions on the design of the present HIV treatment programme in South Africa can be considered suboptimal. We argue there are two fundamental reasons to this. First, while there is a rapidly growing evidence-base to guide priority setting decisions on HIV treatment, its included studies typically consider only one criterion at a time and thus fail to capture the broad range of values that stakeholders have. Second, priority setting on HIV treatment is a highly political process but it seems no adequate participatory processes are in place to incorporate stakeholders’ views and evidences of all sorts. We propose an alternative approach that provides a better evidence base and outlines a fair policy process to improve priority setting in HIV treatment. The approach integrates two increasingly important frameworks on health care priority setting: accountability for reasonableness (A4R) to foster procedural fairness, and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to construct an evidence-base on the feasibility, efficiency, and equity of programme options including trade-offs. The approach provides programmatic guidance on the choice of treatment strategies at various decisions levels based on a sound conceptual framework, and holds large potential to improve HIV priority setting in South Africa. PMID:24107435

Development of research priorities in paediatric pain and palliative care

PubMed Central

Liossi, Christina; Anderson, Anna-Karenia; Howard, Richard F

2016-01-01

Priority setting for healthcare research is as important as conducting the research itself because rigorous and systematic processes of priority setting can make an important contribution to the quality of research. This project aimed to prioritise clinical therapeutic uncertainties in paediatric pain and palliative care in order to encourage and inform the future research agenda and raise the profile of paediatric pain and palliative care in the United Kingdom. Clinical therapeutic uncertainties were identified and transformed into patient, intervention, comparison and outcome (PICO) format and prioritised using a modified Nominal Group Technique. Members of the Clinical Studies Group in Pain and Palliative Care within National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Research Network (CRN)-Children took part in the prioritisation exercise. There were 11 clinically active professionals spanning across a wide range of paediatric disciplines and one parent representative. The top three research priorities related to establishing the safety and efficacy of (1) gabapentin in the management of chronic pain with neuropathic characteristics, (2) intravenous non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the management of post-operative pain in pre-schoolers and (3) different opioid formulations in the management of acute pain in children while at home. Questions about the long-term effect of psychological interventions in the management of chronic pain and various pharmacological interventions to improve pain and symptom management in palliative care were among the ‘top 10’ priorities. The results of prioritisation were included in the UK Database of Uncertainties about the Effects of Treatments (DUETS) database. Increased awareness of priorities and priority-setting processes should encourage clinicians and other stakeholders to engage in such exercises in the future. PMID:28386399

Integrating habitat status, human population pressure, and protection status into biodiversity conservation priority setting

USGS Publications Warehouse

Shi, Hua; Singh, Ashbindu; Kant, S.; Zhu, Zhiliang; Waller, E.

2005-01-01

Priority setting is an essential component of biodiversity conservation. Existing methods to identify priority areas for conservation have focused almost entirely on biological factors. We suggest a new relative ranking method for identifying priority conservation areas that integrates both biological and social aspects. It is based on the following criteria: the habitat's status, human population pressure, human efforts to protect habitat, and number of endemic plant and vertebrate species. We used this method to rank 25 hotspots, 17 megadiverse countries, and the hotspots within each megadiverse country. We used consistent, comprehensive, georeferenced, and multiband data sets and analytical remote sensing and geographic information system tools to quantify habitat status, human population pressure, and protection status. The ranking suggests that the Philippines, Atlantic Forest, Mediterranean Basin, Caribbean Islands, Caucasus, and Indo-Burma are the hottest hotspots and that China, the Philippines, and India are the hottest megadiverse countries. The great variation in terms of habitat, protected areas, and population pressure among the hotspots, the megadiverse countries, and the hotspots within the same country suggests the need for hotspot- and country-specific conservation policies.

Development of a matrix to evaluate the threat of biological agents used for bioterrorism.

PubMed

Tegnell, A; Van Loock, F; Baka, A; Wallyn, S; Hendriks, J; Werner, A; Gouvras, G

2006-10-01

Adequate public health preparedness for bioterrorism includes the elaboration of an agreed list of biological and chemical agents that might be used in an attack or as threats of deliberate release. In the absence of counterterrorism intelligence information, public health authorities can also base their preparedness on the agents for which the national health structures would be most vulnerable. This article aims to describe a logical method and the characteristics of the variables to be brought in a weighing process to reach a priority list for preparedness. The European Union, in the aftermath of the anthrax events of October 2001 in the United States, set up a task force of experts from multiple member states to elaborate and implement a health security programme. One of the first tasks of this task force was to come up with a list of priority threats. The model, presented here, allows Web-based updates for newly identified agents and for the changes occurring in preventive measures for agents already listed. The same model also allows the identification of priority protection action areas.

Identifying priority healthcare trainings in frozen conflict situations: The case of Nagorno Karabagh.

PubMed

Thompson, Michael E; Dorian, Alina H; Harutyunyan, Tsovinar L

2010-12-09

Health care in post-war situations, where the system's human and fixed capital are depleted, is challenging. The addition of a frozen conflict situation, where international recognition of boundaries and authorities are lacking, introduces further complexities. Nagorno Karabagh (NK) is an ethnically Armenian territory locked within post-Soviet Azerbaijan and one such frozen conflict situation. This article highlights the use of evidence-based practice and community engagement to determine priority areas for health care training in NK. Drawing on the precepts of APEXPH (Assessment Protocol for Excellence in Public Health) and MAPP (Mobilizing for Action through Planning and Partnerships), this first-of-its-kind assessment in NK relied on in-depth interviews and focus group discussions supplemented with expert assessments and field observations. Training options were evaluated against a series of ethical and pragmatic principles. A unique factor among the ethical and pragmatic considerations when prioritizing among alternatives was NK's ambiguous political status and consequent sponsor constraints. Training priorities differed across the region and by type of provider, but consensus prioritization emerged for first aid, clinical Integrated Management of Childhood Illnesses, and Adult Disease Management. These priorities were then incorporated into the training programs funded by the sponsor. Programming responsive to both the evidence-base and stakeholder priorities is always desirable and provides a foundation for long-term planning and response. In frozen conflict, low resource settings, such an approach is critical to balancing the community's immediate humanitarian needs with sponsor concerns and constraints.

High Priority Research Needs for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus

PubMed Central

Robinson, Karen A.; Saldanha, Ian J.; Wilson, Lisa M.; Nicholson, Wanda K.

2012-01-01

Abstract Objective Identification of unanswered research questions about the management of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is necessary to focus future research endeavors. We developed a process for elucidating the highest priority research questions on GDM. Methods Using a systematic review on GDM as a starting point, we developed an eight-step process: (1) identification of research gaps, (2) feedback from the review's authors, (3) translation of gaps into researchable questions using population, intervention, comparators, outcomes, setting (PICOS) framework, (4) local institutions' stakeholders' refinement of research questions, (5) national stakeholders' use of Delphi method to develop consensus on the importance of research questions, (6) prioritization of outcomes, (7) conceptual framework, and (8) evaluation. Results We identified 15 high priority research questions for GDM. The research questions focused on medication management of GDM (e.g., various oral agents vs. insulin), delivery management for women with GDM (e.g., induction vs. expectant management), and identification of risk factors for, prevention of, and screening for type 2 diabetes in women with prior GDM. Stakeholders rated the development of chronic diseases in offspring, cesarean delivery, and birth trauma as high priority outcomes to measure in future studies. Conclusions We developed an eight-step process using a multidisciplinary group of stakeholders to identify 15 research questions of high clinical importance. Researchers, policymakers, and funders can use this list to direct research efforts and resources to the highest priority areas to improve care for women with GDM. PMID:22747422

Evaluation of transit signal priority strategies for 400 south light rail line in Salt Lake County, UT : part II.

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

2010-11-01

The goal of this study is to evaluate light rail priority strategies along the 400 S / 500 S corridor in Salt Lake County through analyzing benefits and impacts of the priority on transit and vehicular traffic through microsimulation. The field of st...

Survey of critical failure events in on-chip interconnect by fault tree analysis

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Yokogawa, Shinji; Kunii, Kyousuke

2018-07-01

In this paper, a framework based on reliability physics is proposed for adopting fault tree analysis (FTA) to the on-chip interconnect system of a semiconductor. By integrating expert knowledge and experience regarding the possibilities of failure on basic events, critical issues of on-chip interconnect reliability will be evaluated by FTA. In particular, FTA is used to identify the minimal cut sets with high risk priority. Critical events affecting the on-chip interconnect reliability are identified and discussed from the viewpoint of long-term reliability assessment. The moisture impact is evaluated as an external event.

Priority setting partnership to identify the top 10 research priorities for the management of Parkinson's disease

PubMed Central

Deane, Katherine H O; Flaherty, Helen; Daley, David J; Pascoe, Roland; Penhale, Bridget; Clarke, Carl E; Sackley, Catherine; Storey, Stacey

2014-01-01

Objectives This priority setting partnership was commissioned by Parkinson's UK to encourage people with direct and personal experience of the condition to work together to identify and prioritise the top 10 evidential uncertainties that impact on everyday clinical practice for the management of Parkinson's disease (PD). Setting The UK. Participants Anyone with experience of PD including: people with Parkinson's (PwP), carers, family and friends, healthcare and social care professionals. Non-clinical researchers and employees of pharmaceutical or medical devices companies were excluded. 1000 participants (60% PwP) provided ideas on research uncertainties, 475 (72% PwP) initially prioritised them and 27 (37% PwP) stakeholders agreed a final top 10. Methods Using a modified nominal group technique, participants were surveyed to identify what issues for the management of PD needed research. Unique research questions unanswered by current evidence were identified and participants were asked to identify their top 10 research priorities from this list. The top 26 uncertainties were presented to a consensus meeting with key stakeholders to agree the top 10 research priorities. Results 1000 participants provided 4100 responses, which contained 94 unique unanswered research questions that were initially prioritised by 475 participants. A consensus meeting with 27 stakeholders agreed the top 10 research priorities. The overarching research aspiration was an effective cure for PD. The top 10 research priorities for PD management included the need to address motor symptoms (balance and falls, and fine motor control), non-motor symptoms (sleep and urinary dysfunction), mental health issues (stress and anxiety, dementia and mild cognitive impairments), side effects of medications (dyskinesia) and the need to develop interventions specific to the phenotypes of PD and better monitoring methods. Conclusions These research priorities identify crucial gaps in the existing evidence to address everyday practicalities in the management of the complexities of PD. PMID:25500772

Dynamic autonomous routing technology for IP-based satellite ad hoc networks

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Wang, Xiaofei; Deng, Jing; Kostas, Theresa; Rajappan, Gowri

2014-06-01

IP-based routing for military LEO/MEO satellite ad hoc networks is very challenging due to network and traffic heterogeneity, network topology and traffic dynamics. In this paper, we describe a traffic priority-aware routing scheme for such networks, namely Dynamic Autonomous Routing Technology (DART) for satellite ad hoc networks. DART has a cross-layer design, and conducts routing and resource reservation concurrently for optimal performance in the fluid but predictable satellite ad hoc networks. DART ensures end-to-end data delivery with QoS assurances by only choosing routing paths that have sufficient resources, supporting different packet priority levels. In order to do so, DART incorporates several resource management and innovative routing mechanisms, which dynamically adapt to best fit the prevailing conditions. In particular, DART integrates a resource reservation mechanism to reserve network bandwidth resources; a proactive routing mechanism to set up non-overlapping spanning trees to segregate high priority traffic flows from lower priority flows so that the high priority flows do not face contention from low priority flows; a reactive routing mechanism to arbitrate resources between various traffic priorities when needed; a predictive routing mechanism to set up routes for scheduled missions and for anticipated topology changes for QoS assurance. We present simulation results showing the performance of DART. We have conducted these simulations using the Iridium constellation and trajectories as well as realistic military communications scenarios. The simulation results demonstrate DART's ability to discriminate between high-priority and low-priority traffic flows and ensure disparate QoS requirements of these traffic flows.

A decision support tool for setting population objectives for priority landbirds in the Central Hardwoods and West Gulf Coastal Plain/Quachitas Bird Conservation Regions

Treesearch

D. Todd Jones-Farrand; John M. Tirpak; Frank R. Thompson; Daniel J. Twedt; Charles K. Baxter; Jane A. Fitzgerald; William B. Uihlein

2009-01-01

Setting and achieving population objectives for priority landbirds must be informed by, 1) the quantity, quality, and spatial confi guration of available habitat, 2) an explicit linkage between habitat condition and population response, and 3) expected future habitat conditions. Based on this philosophy, the Central Hardwoods and Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Ventures...

Research priorities for the influence of gender on diagnostic imaging choices in the emergency department setting.

PubMed

Ashurst, John V; Cherney, Alan R; Evans, Elizabeth M; Kennedy Hall, Michael; Hess, Erik P; Kline, Jeffrey A; Mitchell, Alice M; Mills, Angela M; Weigner, Michael B; Moore, Christopher L

2014-12-01

Diagnostic imaging is a cornerstone of patient evaluation in the acute care setting, but little effort has been devoted to understanding the appropriate influence of sex and gender on imaging choices. This article provides background on this issue and a description of the working group and consensus findings reached during the diagnostic imaging breakout session at the 2014 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference "Gender-specific Research in Emergency Care: Investigate, Understand, and Translate How Gender Affects Patient Outcomes." Our goal was to determine research priorities for how sex and gender may (or should) affect imaging choices in the acute care setting. Prior to the conference, the working group identified five areas for discussion regarding the research agenda in sex- and gender-based imaging using literature review and expert consensus. The nominal group technique was used to identify areas for discussion for common presenting complaints to the emergency department where ionizing radiation is often used for diagnosis: suspected pulmonary embolism, suspected kidney stone, lower abdominal pain with a concern for appendicitis, and chest pain concerning for coronary artery disease. The role of sex- and gender-based shared decision-making in diagnostic imaging decisions is also raised. © 2014 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

Development of a prototype land use model for statewide transportation planning activities : summary.

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

2011-01-01

Developing computer models of land use and : integrated transportation-land use are high : priorities for Florida transportation planners. : Land use information is fundamental to siting : roadways, signaling, setting maintenance : priorities, routin...

12 CFR 650.50 - Payment of claims.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... other equities in accordance with the priorities for impairment set forth in section 8.4(e)(3) of the... claim of a lesser priority. If there are insufficient funds to pay all claims in a class in full...

Translational educational research: a necessity for effective health-care improvement.

PubMed

McGaghie, William C; Issenberg, S Barry; Cohen, Elaine R; Barsuk, Jeffrey H; Wayne, Diane B

2012-11-01

Medical education research contributes to translational science (TS) when its outcomes not only impact educational settings, but also downstream results, including better patient-care practices and improved patient outcomes. Simulation-based medical education (SBME) has demonstrated its role in achieving such distal results. Effective TS also encompasses implementation science, the science of health-care delivery. Educational, clinical, quality, and safety goals can only be achieved by thematic, sustained, and cumulative research programs, not isolated studies. Components of an SBME TS research program include motivated learners, curriculum grounded in evidence-based learning theory, educational resources, evaluation of downstream results, a productive research team, rigorous research methods, research resources, and health-care system acceptance and implementation. National research priorities are served from translational educational research. National funding priorities should endorse the contribution and value of translational education research.

Active Solution Space and Search on Job-shop Scheduling Problem

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Watanabe, Masato; Ida, Kenichi; Gen, Mitsuo

In this paper we propose a new searching method of Genetic Algorithm for Job-shop scheduling problem (JSP). The coding method that represent job number in order to decide a priority to arrange a job to Gannt Chart (called the ordinal representation with a priority) in JSP, an active schedule is created by using left shift. We define an active solution at first. It is solution which can create an active schedule without using left shift, and set of its defined an active solution space. Next, we propose an algorithm named Genetic Algorithm with active solution space search (GA-asol) which can create an active solution while solution is evaluated, in order to search the active solution space effectively. We applied it for some benchmark problems to compare with other method. The experimental results show good performance.

What criteria do decision makers in Thailand use to set priorities for vaccine introduction?

PubMed

Pooripussarakul, Siriporn; Riewpaiboon, Arthorn; Bishai, David; Muangchana, Charung; Tantivess, Sripen

2016-08-02

There is a need to identify rational criteria and set priorities for vaccines. In Thailand, many licensed vaccines are being considering for introduction into the Expanded Program on Immunization; thus, the government has to make decisions about which vaccines should be adopted. This study aimed to set priorities for new vaccines and to facilitate decision analysis. We used a best-worst scaling study for rank-ordering of vaccines. The candidate vaccines were determined by a set of criteria, including burden of disease, target age group, budget impact, side effect, effectiveness, severity of disease, and cost of vaccine. The criteria were identified from a literature review and by in-depth, open-ended interviews with experts. The priority-setting model was conducted among three groups of stakeholders, including policy makers, healthcare professionals and healthcare administrators. The vaccine data were mapped and then calculated for the probability of selection. From the candidate vaccines, the probability of hepatitis B vaccine being selected by all respondents (96.67 %) was ranked first. This was followed, respectively, by pneumococcal conjugate vaccine-13 (95.09 %) and Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine (90.87 %). The three groups of stakeholders (policy makers, healthcare professionals and healthcare administrators) showed the same ranking trends. Most severe disease, high fever rate and high disease burden showed the highest coefficients for criterion levels being selected by all respondents. This result can be implied that a vaccine which can prevent most severe disease with high disease burden and has low safety has a greater chance of being selected by respondents in this study. The priority setting of vaccines through a multiple-criteria approach could contribute to transparency and accountability in the decision-making process. This is a step forward in the development of an evidence-based approach that meets the need of developing country. The methodology is generalizable but its application to another country would require the criteria as relevant to that country.

Evaluating International Research Ethics Capacity Development: An Empirical Approach

PubMed Central

Ali, Joseph; Kass, Nancy E.; Sewankambo, Nelson K.; White, Tara D.; Hyder, Adnan A.

2014-01-01

The US National Institutes of health, Fogarty International Center (NIH-FIC) has, for the past 13 years, been a leading funder of international research ethics education for resource-limited settings. Nearly half of the NIH-FIC funding in this area has gone to training programs that train individuals from sub-Saharan Africa. Identifying the impact of training investments, as well as the potential predictors of post-training success, can support curricular decision-making, help establish funding priorities, and recognize the ultimate outcomes of trainees and training programs. Comprehensive evaluation frameworks and targeted evaluation tools for bioethics training programs generally, and for international research ethics programs in particular, are largely absent from published literature. This paper shares an original conceptual framework, data collection tool, and detailed methods for evaluating the inputs, processes, outputs, and outcomes of research ethics training programs serving individuals in resource-limited settings. This paper is part of a collection of papers analyzing the Fogarty International Center’s International Research Ethics Education and Curriculum Development program. PMID:24782071

Treatment costs and priority setting in health care: A qualitative study

PubMed Central

McKie, John; Shrimpton, Bradley; Richardson, Jeff; Hurworth, Rosalind

2009-01-01

Background The aim of this study is to investigate whether the public believes high cost patients should be a lower priority for public health care than low cost patients, other things being equal, in order to maximise health gains from the health budget. Semi-structured group discussions were used to help participants reflect critically upon their own views and gain exposure to alternative views, and in this way elicit underlying values rather than unreflective preferences. Participants were given two main tasks: first, to select from among three general principles for setting health care priorities the one that comes closest to their own views; second, to allocate a limited hospital budget between two groups of imaginary patients. Forty-one people, varying in age, occupation, income and education level, participated in a total of six group discussions with each group comprising between six and eight people. Results After discussion and deliberation, 30 participants rejected the most cost-effective principle for setting priorities, citing reasons such as 'moral values' and 'a personal belief that we shouldn't discriminate'. Only three participants chose to allocate the entire hospital budget to the low cost patients. Reasons for allocating some money to inefficient (high cost) patients included 'fairness' and the desire to give all patients a 'chance'. Conclusion Participants rejected a single-minded focus on efficiency – maximising health gains – when setting priorities in health care. There was a concern to avoid strategies that deny patients all hope of treatment, and a willingness to sacrifice health gains for a 'fair' public health system. PMID:19416546

Final priority; National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research--Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers. Final priority.

PubMed

2014-06-05

The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services announces a priority for the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program administered by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). Specifically, we announce a priority for a Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Technologies to Enhance Independence in Daily Living for Adults with Cognitive Impairments. The Assistant Secretary may use this priority for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2014 and later years. We take this action to focus research attention on an area of national need. We intend the priority to contribute to improved outcomes related to independence in daily activities in the home, community, or workplace setting for adults with cognitive impairments.

Toward a VA Women's Health Research Agenda: setting evidence-based priorities to improve the health and health care of women veterans.

PubMed

Yano, Elizabeth M; Bastian, Lori A; Frayne, Susan M; Howell, Alexandra L; Lipson, Linda R; McGlynn, Geraldine; Schnurr, Paula P; Seaver, Margaret R; Spungen, Ann M; Fihn, Stephan D

2006-03-01

The expansion of women in the military is reshaping the veteran population, with women now constituting the fastest growing segment of eligible VA health care users. In recognition of the changing demographics and special health care needs of women, the VA Office of Research & Development recently sponsored the first national VA Women's Health Research Agenda-setting conference to map research priorities to the needs of women veterans and position VA as a national leader in Women's Health Research. This paper summarizes the process and outcomes of this effort, outlining VA's research priorities for biomedical, clinical, rehabilitation, and health services research.

Toward a VA Women's Health Research Agenda: Setting Evidence-based Priorities to Improve the Health and Health Care of Women Veterans

PubMed Central

Yano, Elizabeth M; Bastian, Lori A; Frayne, Susan M; Howell, Alexandra L; Lipson, Linda R; McGlynn, Geraldine; Schnurr, Paula P; Seaver, Margaret R; Spungen, Ann M; Fihn, Stephan D

2006-01-01

The expansion of women in the military is reshaping the veteran population, with women now constituting the fastest growing segment of eligible VA health care users. In recognition of the changing demographics and special health care needs of women, the VA Office of Research & Development recently sponsored the first national VA Women's Health Research Agenda-setting conference to map research priorities to the needs of women veterans and position VA as a national leader in Women's Health Research. This paper summarizes the process and outcomes of this effort, outlining VA's research priorities for biomedical, clinical, rehabilitation, and health services research. PMID:16637953

Setting priorities for comparative effectiveness research on management of primary angle closure: a survey of Asia-Pacific clinicians.

PubMed

Yu, Tsung; Li, Tianjing; Lee, Kinbo J; Friedman, David S; Dickersin, Kay; Puhan, Milo A

2015-01-01

To set priorities for new systematic reviews (SRs) and randomized clinical trials on the management of primary angle closure (PAC) using clinical practice guidelines and a survey of Asia-Pacific clinicians. We restated the American Academy of Ophthalmology's Preferred Practice Patterns recommendations for management of PAC into answerable clinical questions. We asked participants at the Asia-Pacific Joint Glaucoma Congress 2010 in Taipei to rate the importance of having an answer to each question for providing effective patient care, using a Likert-type scale and scoring from 0 (not important at all) to 10 (highly important). We identified relevant SRs and mapped the evidence to clinical questions to identify evidence gaps. We generated 42 clinical questions. One hundred seventy-five individuals agreed to participate in the survey, 132 responded (75.4% response rate) and 96 completed the questionnaire (54.9% usable response rate). Questions rated important include laser iridotomy for the prevention of angle closure in primary angle-closure suspects, further therapies in eyes with plateau iris syndrome after laser iridotomy, and evaluation of the fellow eye in acute angle-closure patients for improving prognosis. Up-to-date and conclusive SR evidence was not available for any of the 42 clinical questions. We identified high priority clinical questions on the management of PAC, none of which had reliable SR evidence available. New SRs and randomized clinical trials can be initiated to address these evidence gaps.

Increased fairness in priority setting processes within the health sector: the case of Kapiri-Mposhi District, Zambia

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background The challenge of priority setting (PS) in health care within contexts of severe resource limitations has continued to receive attention. Accountability for Reasonableness (AFR) has emerged as a useful framework to guide the implementation of PS processes. In 2006, the AFR approach to enhance legitimate and fair PS was introduced by researchers and decision makers within the health sector in the EU funded research project entitled ‘Response to Accountable priority setting for Trust in health systems’ (REACT). The project aimed to strengthen fairness and accountability in the PS processes of health systems at district level in Zambia, Tanzania and Kenya. This paper focuses on local perceptions and practices of fair PS (baseline study) as well as at the evolution of such perceptions and practices in PS following an AFR based intervention (evaluation study), carried out at district level in Kapiri-Mposhi District in Zambia. Methods Data was collected using in depth interviews (IDIs), focus group discussions (FGDs) and review of documents from national to district level. The study population for this paper consisted of health related stakeholders employed in the district administration, in non-governmental organizations (NGO) and in health facilities. Results During the baseline study, concepts of legitimacy and fairness in PS processes were found to be grounded in local values of equity and impartiality. Government and other organizational strategies strongly supported devolution of PS and decision making procedures. However, important gaps were identified in terms of experiences of stakeholder involvement and fairness in PS processes in practice. The evaluation study revealed that a transformation of the views and methods regarding fairness in PS processes was ongoing in the study district, which was partly attributed to the AFR based intervention. Conclusions The study findings suggest that increased attention was given to fairness in PS processes at district level. The changes were linked to a number of simultaneous factors among them the concepts introduced by the present project with its emphasis on fairness and enhanced participation. A responsive leadership that was increasingly accountable to its operational staff and communities emerged as one of the key elements in driving the processes forward. PMID:24548767

Increased fairness in priority setting processes within the health sector: the case of Kapiri-Mposhi District, Zambia.

PubMed

Zulu, Joseph M; Michelo, Charles; Msoni, Carol; Hurtig, Anna-Karin; Byskov, Jens; Blystad, Astrid

2014-02-18

The challenge of priority setting (PS) in health care within contexts of severe resource limitations has continued to receive attention. Accountability for Reasonableness (AFR) has emerged as a useful framework to guide the implementation of PS processes. In 2006, the AFR approach to enhance legitimate and fair PS was introduced by researchers and decision makers within the health sector in the EU funded research project entitled 'Response to Accountable priority setting for Trust in health systems' (REACT). The project aimed to strengthen fairness and accountability in the PS processes of health systems at district level in Zambia, Tanzania and Kenya. This paper focuses on local perceptions and practices of fair PS (baseline study) as well as at the evolution of such perceptions and practices in PS following an AFR based intervention (evaluation study), carried out at district level in Kapiri-Mposhi District in Zambia. Data was collected using in depth interviews (IDIs), focus group discussions (FGDs) and review of documents from national to district level. The study population for this paper consisted of health related stakeholders employed in the district administration, in non-governmental organizations (NGO) and in health facilities. During the baseline study, concepts of legitimacy and fairness in PS processes were found to be grounded in local values of equity and impartiality. Government and other organizational strategies strongly supported devolution of PS and decision making procedures. However, important gaps were identified in terms of experiences of stakeholder involvement and fairness in PS processes in practice. The evaluation study revealed that a transformation of the views and methods regarding fairness in PS processes was ongoing in the study district, which was partly attributed to the AFR based intervention. The study findings suggest that increased attention was given to fairness in PS processes at district level. The changes were linked to a number of simultaneous factors among them the concepts introduced by the present project with its emphasis on fairness and enhanced participation. A responsive leadership that was increasingly accountable to its operational staff and communities emerged as one of the key elements in driving the processes forward.

Consensus and contention in the priority setting process: examining the health sector in Uganda.

PubMed

Colenbrander, Sarah; Birungi, Charles; Mbonye, Anthony K

2015-06-01

Health priority setting is a critical and contentious issue in low-income countries because of the high burden of disease relative to the limited resource envelope. Many sophisticated quantitative tools and policy frameworks have been developed to promote transparent priority setting processes and allocative efficiency. However, low-income countries frequently lack effective governance systems or implementation capacity, so high-level priorities are not determined through evidence-based decision-making processes. This study uses qualitative research methods to explore how key actors' priorities differ in low-income countries, using Uganda as a case study. Human resources for health, disease prevention and family planning emerge as the common priorities among actors in the health sector (although the last of these is particularly emphasized by international agencies) because of their contribution to the long-term sustainability of health-care provision. Financing health-care services is the most disputed issue. Participants from the Ugandan Ministry of Health preferentially sought to increase net health expenditure and government ownership of the health sector, while non-state actors prioritized improving the efficiency of resource use. Ultimately it is apparent that the power to influence national health outcomes lies with only a handful of decision-makers within key institutions in the health sector, such as the Ministries of Health, the largest bilateral donors and the multilateral development agencies. These power relations reinforce the need for ongoing research into the paradigms and strategic interests of these actors. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine © The Author 2014; all rights reserved.

Key factors that influence government policies and decision making about healthcare priorities: Lessons for the field of eating disorders.

PubMed

Whiteford, Harvey; Weissman, Ruth Striegel

2017-03-01

Worldwide, the demand for healthcare exceeds what individuals and governments are able to afford. Priority setting is therefore inevitable, and mental health services have often been given low priority in the decision-making process. Drawing on established economic criteria, and specifically the work of Philip Musgrove, key factors which influence government decision-making about health priorities are reviewed. These factors include the size of the health burden, the availability of cost-effective interventions to reduce the burden, whether private markets can provide the necessary treatment efficiently, whether there are "catastrophic costs" incurred in accessing treatment, whether negative externalities arise from not providing care, and if the "rule of rescue" applies. Beyond setting priorities for resource allocation, governments also become involved where there is a need for regulation to maintain quality in the delivery of healthcare. By providing field-specific examples for each factor, we illustrate how advocates in the eating disorder field may use evidence to inform government policy about resource allocation and regulation in support of individuals with an eating disorder. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Multi-criteria decision making--an approach to setting priorities in health care.

PubMed

Nobre, F F; Trotta, L T; Gomes, L F

1999-12-15

The objective of this paper is to present a multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) approach to support public health decision making that takes into consideration the fuzziness of the decision goals and the behavioural aspect of the decision maker. The approach is used to analyse the process of health technology procurement in a University Hospital in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The method, known as TODIM, relies on evaluating alternatives with a set of decision criteria assessed using an ordinal scale. Fuzziness in generating criteria scores and weights or conflicts caused by dealing with different viewpoints of a group of decision makers (DMs) are solved using fuzzy set aggregation rules. The results suggested that MCDM models, incorporating fuzzy set approaches, should form a set of tools for public health decision making analysis, particularly when there are polarized opinions and conflicting objectives from the DM group. Copyright 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Evaluation of Contrail Reduction Strategies Based on Aircraft Flight Distances

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Chen, Neil Y.; Sridhar, Banavar; Li, Jinhua; Ng, Hok Kwan

2012-01-01

This paper evaluates a set of contrail reduction strategies based on the flight range of aircraft as contrail reduction strategies have different impacts on aircraft depending on how they plan to fly. In general, aircraft with longer flight distances cruise at the altitudes where contrails are more likely to form. The concept of the contrail frequency index is used to quantify contrail impacts. The strategy for reducing the persistent contrail formation is to minimize the contrail frequency index by altering the aircraft's cruising altitude. A user-defined factor is used to trade off between contrail reduction and extra CO2 emissions. A higher value of tradeoff factor results in more contrail reduction and extra CO2 emissions. Results show that contrail reduction strategies using various tradeo factors behave differently from short-range flights to long-range ights. Analysis shows that short-distance flights (less than 500 miles) are the most frequent flights but contribute least to contrail reduction. Therefore these aircraft have the lowest priority when applying contrail reduction strategies. Medium-distance flights (500 to 1000 miles) have a higher priority if the goal is to achieve maximum contrail reduction in total; long-distance flights (1000 to 1500 miles) have a higher priority if the goal is to achieve maximum contrail reduction per flight. The characteristics of transcontinental flights (greater than 1500 miles) vary with different weather days so the priority of applying contrail reduction strategies to the group needs to be evaluated based on the locations of the contrail areas during any given day. For the days tested, medium-distance ights contribute up to 42.6% of the reduction among the groups during a day. The contrail frequency index per 1,000 miles for medium-distance, long-distance, and transcontinental flights can be reduced by an average of 75%. The results provide a starting point for developing operational policies to reduce the impact of aviation on climate based on aircraft flight distances.

Diarrhoeal diseases and the global health agenda: measuring and changing priority.

PubMed

Bump, Jesse B; Reich, Michael R; Johnson, Anne M

2013-12-01

We investigate priority setting and the global health agenda by analysing the control of diarrhoeal diseases (CDD). CDD was one of the 'twin engines' of the 1980s' child survival movement, but now has a low priority on the global health agenda, even though diarrhoeal diseases still claim around 1.5 million children annually. In this article, we develop a framework and four indicators of priority to measure CDD's overall prominence on the global health agenda over the last three decades: trends in treatment coverage, changes in perceived priority, changes in financial support and institutional involvement and bibliographic trends. We find that CDD's priority is now one-sixth to one-third of its level in 1985. We then use political analysis to suggest strategies for reframing CDD as an issue and promoting its priority on the global health agenda.

A Study on Project Priority Evaluation Method on Road Slope Disaster Prevention Management

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Sekiguchi, Nobuyasu; Ohtsu, Hiroyasu; Izu, Ryuutarou

To improve the safety and security of driving while coping with today's stagnant economy and frequent natural disasters, road slopes should be appropriately managed. To achieve the goals, road managers should establish project priority evaluation methods for each stage of road slope management by clarifying social losses that would result by drops in service levels. It is important that road managers evaluate a project priority properly to manage the road slope effectively. From this viewpoint, this study proposed "project priority evaluation methods" in road slope disaster prevention, which use available slope information at each stage of road slope management under limited funds. In addition, this study investigated the effect of managing it from the high slope of the priority by evaluating a risk of slope failure. In terms of the amount of available information, staged information provision is needed ranging from macroscopic studies, which involves evaluation of the entire route at each stage of decision making, to semi- and microscopic investigations for evaluating slopes, and microscopic investigations for evaluating individual slopes. With limited funds, additional detailed surveys are difficult to perform. It is effective to use the slope risk assessment system, which was constructed to complement detailed data, to extract sites to perform precise investigations.

Utilization Bound of Non-preemptive Fixed Priority Schedulers

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Park, Moonju; Chae, Jinseok

It is known that the schedulability of a non-preemptive task set with fixed priority can be determined in pseudo-polynomial time. However, since Rate Monotonic scheduling is not optimal for non-preemptive scheduling, the applicability of existing polynomial time tests that provide sufficient schedulability conditions, such as Liu and Layland's bound, is limited. This letter proposes a new sufficient condition for non-preemptive fixed priority scheduling that can be used for any fixed priority assignment scheme. It is also shown that the proposed schedulability test has a tighter utilization bound than existing test methods.

Research priorities for adolescent health in low- and middle-income countries: A mixed-methods synthesis of two separate exercises.

PubMed

Nagata, Jason M; Hathi, Sejal; Ferguson, B Jane; Hindin, Michele J; Yoshida, Sachiyo; Ross, David A

2018-06-01

In order to clarify priorities and stimulate research in adolescent health in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted two priority-setting exercises based on the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology related to 1) adolescent sexual and reproductive health and 2) eight areas of adolescent health including communicable diseases prevention and management, injuries and violence, mental health, non-communicable diseases management, nutrition, physical activity, substance use, and health policy. Although the CHNRI methodology has been utilized in over 50 separate research priority setting exercises, none have qualitatively synthesized the ultimate findings across studies. The purpose of this study was to conduct a mixed-method synthesis of two research priority-setting exercises for adolescent health in LMICs based on the CHNRI methodology and to situate the priority questions within the current global health agenda. All of the 116 top-ranked questions presented in each exercise were analyzed by two independent reviewers. Word clouds were generated based on keywords from the top-ranked questions. Questions were coded and content analysis was conducted based on type of delivery platform, vulnerable populations, and the Survive, Thrive, and Transform framework from the United Nations Global Strategy for Women's, Children's, and Adolescents' Health, 2016-2030. Within the 53 top-ranked intervention-related questions that specified a delivery platform, the platforms specified were schools (n = 17), primary care (n = 12), community (n = 11), parenting (n = 6), virtual media (n = 5), and peers (n = 2). Twenty questions specifically focused on vulnerable adolescents, including those living with HIV, tuberculosis, mental illness, or neurodevelopmental disorders; victims of gender-based violence; refugees; young persons who inject drugs; sex workers; slum dwellers; out-of-school youth; and youth in armed conflict. A majority of the top-ranked questions (108/116) aligned with one or a combination of the Survive (n = 39), Thrive (n = 67), and Transform (n = 28) agendas. This study advances the CHNRI methodology by conducting the first mixed-methods synthesis of multiple research priority-setting exercises by analyzing keywords (using word clouds) and themes (using content analysis).

Discovery, research, and development of new antibiotics: the WHO priority list of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and tuberculosis.

PubMed

Tacconelli, Evelina; Carrara, Elena; Savoldi, Alessia; Harbarth, Stephan; Mendelson, Marc; Monnet, Dominique L; Pulcini, Céline; Kahlmeter, Gunnar; Kluytmans, Jan; Carmeli, Yehuda; Ouellette, Marc; Outterson, Kevin; Patel, Jean; Cavaleri, Marco; Cox, Edward M; Houchens, Chris R; Grayson, M Lindsay; Hansen, Paul; Singh, Nalini; Theuretzbacher, Ursula; Magrini, Nicola

2018-03-01

The spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria poses a substantial threat to morbidity and mortality worldwide. Due to its large public health and societal implications, multidrug-resistant tuberculosis has been long regarded by WHO as a global priority for investment in new drugs. In 2016, WHO was requested by member states to create a priority list of other antibiotic-resistant bacteria to support research and development of effective drugs. We used a multicriteria decision analysis method to prioritise antibiotic-resistant bacteria; this method involved the identification of relevant criteria to assess priority against which each antibiotic-resistant bacterium was rated. The final priority ranking of the antibiotic-resistant bacteria was established after a preference-based survey was used to obtain expert weighting of criteria. We selected 20 bacterial species with 25 patterns of acquired resistance and ten criteria to assess priority: mortality, health-care burden, community burden, prevalence of resistance, 10-year trend of resistance, transmissibility, preventability in the community setting, preventability in the health-care setting, treatability, and pipeline. We stratified the priority list into three tiers (critical, high, and medium priority), using the 33rd percentile of the bacterium's total scores as the cutoff. Critical-priority bacteria included carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and carbapenem-resistant and third-generation cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacteriaceae. The highest ranked Gram-positive bacteria (high priority) were vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium and meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Of the bacteria typically responsible for community-acquired infections, clarithromycin-resistant Helicobacter pylori, and fluoroquinolone-resistant Campylobacter spp, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and Salmonella typhi were included in the high-priority tier. Future development strategies should focus on antibiotics that are active against multidrug-resistant tuberculosis and Gram-negative bacteria. The global strategy should include antibiotic-resistant bacteria responsible for community-acquired infections such as Salmonella spp, Campylobacter spp, N gonorrhoeae, and H pylori. World Health Organization. Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Identifying research priorities with nurses at a tertiary children's hospital in the United Kingdom.

PubMed

Williams, A; Sell, D; Oulton, K; Wilson, N; Wray, J; Gibson, F

2017-03-01

The objective of this study was to undertake a research priority setting exercise with the aim of maximizing efficiency and impact in research activity undertaken by nurses at one children's tertiary healthcare institution by ensuring the clinical staff directly shaped a coherent, transparent and consensus driven nurse-led research agenda. In Round 1, the research topics of 147 nurses were elicited using a modified nominal group technique as the consensus method. The number of participants in the 24 separate discussions ranged from 3 to 21, generating lists of between 6 and 23 topics. In Round 2, nurses from the clinical areas ranked topics of importance resulting in a set of four to five priorities. In Round 3, the divisional heads of nursing consulted with staff in all of their clinical areas to each finalize their five divisional priorities. The Nursing Research Working Group discussed and refined the divisions' priorities and voted on the final list to agree the top five research priorities for the organization. A total of 269 research topics were initially generated. Following three rounds of ranking and prioritizing, five priorities were agreed at Divisional level, and from these, the five top organizational priorities were selected. These were (i) understanding and improving all aspects of the patient journey through the hospital system; (ii) play; (iii) staff wellbeing, patient care and productivity; (iv) team work - linking to a more efficient service; and (v) supporting parents/parent pathway. Divisional priorities have been disseminated widely to clinical teams to inform a patient-specific nurse-led research agenda. Organizational priorities agreed upon have been disseminated through management structures and processes to ensure engagement at all levels. A subgroup of the Nursing Research Working Group has been delegated to take this work forward so that the agreed priorities continue to contribute towards shaping nurse-led research activity, thereby going some way to inform and embed an evidence-based culture of inquiry. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Use of cost-effectiveness data in priority setting decisions: experiences from the national guidelines for heart diseases in Sweden

PubMed Central

Eckard, Nathalie; Janzon, Magnus; Levin, Lars-Åke

2014-01-01

Background: The inclusion of cost-effectiveness data, as a basis for priority setting rankings, is a distinguishing feature in the formulation of the Swedish national guidelines. Guidelines are generated with the direct intent to influence health policy and support decisions about the efficient allocation of scarce healthcare resources. Certain medical conditions may be given higher priority rankings i.e. given more resources than others, depending on how serious the medical condition is. This study investigated how a decision-making group, the Priority Setting Group (PSG), used cost-effectiveness data in ranking priority setting decisions in the national guidelines for heart diseases. Methods: A qualitative case study methodology was used to explore the use of such data in ranking priority setting healthcare decisions. The study addressed availability of cost-effectiveness data, evidence understanding, interpretation difficulties, and the reliance on evidence. We were also interested in the explicit use of data in ranking decisions, especially in situations where economic arguments impacted the reasoning behind the decisions. Results: This study showed that cost-effectiveness data was an important and integrated part of the decision-making process. Involvement of a health economist and reliance on the data facilitated the use of cost-effectiveness data. Economic arguments were used both as a fine-tuning instrument and a counterweight for dichotomization. Cost-effectiveness data were used when the overall evidence base was weak and the decision-makers had trouble making decisions due to lack of clinical evidence and in times of uncertainty. Cost-effectiveness data were also used for decisions on the introduction of new expensive medical technologies. Conclusion: Cost-effectiveness data matters in decision-making processes and the results of this study could be applicable to other jurisdictions where health economics is implemented in decision-making. This study contributes to knowledge on how cost-effectiveness data is used in actual decision-making, to ensure that the decisions are offered on equal terms and that patients receive medical care according their needs in order achieve maximum benefit. PMID:25396208

Open to All? Nationwide Evaluation of High-Priority Web Accessibility Considerations among Higher Education Websites

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Kimmons, Royce

2017-01-01

This study seeks to evaluate the basic Priority 1 web accessibility of all college and university websites in the US (n = 3141). Utilizing web scraping and automated content analysis, the study establishes that even in the case of high-priority, simple-to-address accessibility requirements, colleges and universities generally fail to make their…

The role of support staff in promoting the social inclusion of persons with an intellectual disability.

PubMed

McConkey, R; Collins, S

2010-08-01

Past studies have found that people supported in more individualised housing options tend to have levels of community participation and wider social networks than those in other accommodation options. Yet, the contribution of support staff in facilitating social inclusion has received relatively scant attention. In all 245 staff working in either supported living schemes, or shared residential and group homes, or in day centres completed a written questionnaire in which they rated in terms of priority to their job, 16 tasks that were supportive of social inclusion and a further 16 tasks that related to the care of the person they supported. In addition staff identified those tasks that they considered were not appropriate to their job. Across all three service settings, staff rated more care tasks as having higher priority than they did the social inclusion tasks. However, staff in supported living schemes rated more social inclusion tasks as having high priority than did staff in the other two service settings. Equally the staff who were most inclined to rate social inclusion tasks as not being applicable to their job were those working day centres; female rather than male staff, those in front-line staff rather than senior staff, and those in part-time or relief positions rather than full-time posts. However, within each service settings, there were wide variations in how staff rated the social inclusion tasks. Staff working in more individualised support arrangements tend to give greater priority to promoting social inclusion although this can vary widely both across and within staff teams. Nonetheless, staff gave greater priority to care tasks especially in congregated service settings. Service managers may need to give more emphasis to social inclusion tasks and provide the leadership, training and resources to facilitate support staff to re-assess their priorities.

Identifying and prioritising systematic review topics with public health stakeholders: A protocol for a modified Delphi study in Switzerland to inform future research agendas

PubMed Central

Mütsch, Margot; Kien, Christina; Gerhardus, Ansgar; Lhachimi, Stefan K

2017-01-01

Introduction The Cochrane Collaboration aims to produce relevant and top priority evidence that responds to existing evidence gaps. Hence, research priority setting (RPS) is important to identify which potential research gaps are deemed most important. Moreover, RPS supports future health research to conform both health and health evidence needs. However, studies that are prioritising systematic review topics in public health are surprisingly rare. Therefore, to inform the research agenda of Cochrane Public Health Europe (CPHE), we introduce the protocol of a priority setting study on systematic review topics in several European countries, which is conceptualised as pilot. Methods and analysis We will conduct a two-round modified Delphi study in Switzerland, incorporating an anonymous web-based questionnaire, to assess which topics should be prioritised for systematic reviews in public health. In the first Delphi round public health stakeholders will suggest relevant assessment criteria and potential priority topics. In the second Delphi round the participants indicate their (dis)agreement to the aggregated results of the first round and rate the potential review topics with the predetermined criteria on a four-point Likert scale. As we invite a wide variety of stakeholders we will compare the results between the different stakeholder groups. Ethics and dissemination We have received ethical approval from the ethical board of the University of Bremen, Germany (principal investigation is conducted at the University of Bremen) and a certificate of non-objection from the Canton of Zurich, Switzerland (fieldwork will be conducted in Switzerland). The results of this study will be further disseminated through peer reviewed publication and will support systematic review author groups (i.a. CPHE) to improve the relevance of the groups´ future review work. Finally, the proposed priority setting study can be used as a framework by other systematic review groups when conducting a priority setting study in a different context. PMID:28780546

A traffic priority language for collision-free navigation of autonomous mobile robots in dynamic environments.

PubMed

Bourbakis, N G

1997-01-01

This paper presents a generic traffic priority language, called KYKLOFORTA, used by autonomous robots for collision-free navigation in a dynamic unknown or known navigation space. In a previous work by X. Grossmman (1988), a set of traffic control rules was developed for the navigation of the robots on the lines of a two-dimensional (2-D) grid and a control center coordinated and synchronized their movements. In this work, the robots are considered autonomous: they are moving anywhere and in any direction inside the free space, and there is no need of a central control to coordinate and synchronize them. The requirements for each robot are i) visual perception, ii) range sensors, and iii) the ability of each robot to detect other moving objects in the same free navigation space, define the other objects perceived size, their velocity and their directions. Based on these assumptions, a traffic priority language is needed for each robot, making it able to decide during the navigation and avoid possible collision with other moving objects. The traffic priority language proposed here is based on a set of primitive traffic priority alphabet and rules which compose pattern of corridors for the application of the traffic priority rules.

Region 6's 2016 Strategic Plan and 2015 Accomplishment Report

EPA Pesticide Factsheets

The EPA Region 6 Strategic Plan highlights the goals we have set out to accomplish in 2016 based on each of our priorities. areas. Our Accomplishment Report summarizes our work in meeting these priorities during the prior year.

29 CFR 1990.122 - Response to petitions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... (CONTINUED) IDENTIFICATION, CLASSIFICATION, AND REGULATION OF POTENTIAL OCCUPATIONAL CARCINOGENS Priority Setting § 1990.122 Response to petitions. Whenever the Secretary receives any information submitted in... publishing the Candidate List and Priority Lists and to reconsider the criteria used in establishing the...

Complementarity and Area-Efficiency in the Prioritization of the Global Protected Area Network.

PubMed

Kullberg, Peter; Toivonen, Tuuli; Montesino Pouzols, Federico; Lehtomäki, Joona; Di Minin, Enrico; Moilanen, Atte

2015-01-01

Complementarity and cost-efficiency are widely used principles for protected area network design. Despite the wide use and robust theoretical underpinnings, their effects on the performance and patterns of priority areas are rarely studied in detail. Here we compare two approaches for identifying the management priority areas inside the global protected area network: 1) a scoring-based approach, used in recently published analysis and 2) a spatial prioritization method, which accounts for complementarity and area-efficiency. Using the same IUCN species distribution data the complementarity method found an equal-area set of priority areas with double the mean species ranges covered compared to the scoring-based approach. The complementarity set also had 72% more species with full ranges covered, and lacked any coverage only for half of the species compared to the scoring approach. Protected areas in our complementarity-based solution were on average smaller and geographically more scattered. The large difference between the two solutions highlights the need for critical thinking about the selected prioritization method. According to our analysis, accounting for complementarity and area-efficiency can lead to considerable improvements when setting management priorities for the global protected area network.

Setting health research priorities using the CHNRI method: VII. A review of the first 50 applications of the CHNRI method.

PubMed

Rudan, Igor; Yoshida, Sachiyo; Chan, Kit Yee; Sridhar, Devi; Wazny, Kerri; Nair, Harish; Sheikh, Aziz; Tomlinson, Mark; Lawn, Joy E; Bhutta, Zulfiqar A; Bahl, Rajiv; Chopra, Mickey; Campbell, Harry; El Arifeen, Shams; Black, Robert E; Cousens, Simon

2017-06-01

Several recent reviews of the methods used to set research priorities have identified the CHNRI method (acronym derived from the "Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative") as an approach that clearly became popular and widely used over the past decade. In this paper we review the first 50 examples of application of the CHNRI method, published between 2007 and 2016, and summarize the most important messages that emerged from those experiences. We conducted a literature review to identify the first 50 examples of application of the CHNRI method in chronological order. We searched Google Scholar, PubMed and so-called grey literature. Initially, between 2007 and 2011, the CHNRI method was mainly used for setting research priorities to address global child health issues, although the first cases of application outside this field (eg, mental health, disabilities and zoonoses) were also recorded. Since 2012 the CHNRI method was used more widely, expanding into the topics such as adolescent health, dementia, national health policy and education. The majority of the exercises were focused on issues that were only relevant to low- and middle-income countries, and national-level applications are on the rise. The first CHNRI-based articles adhered to the five recommended priority-setting criteria, but by 2016 more than two-thirds of all conducted exercises departed from recommendations, modifying the CHNRI method to suit each particular exercise. This was done not only by changing the number of criteria used, but also by introducing some entirely new criteria (eg, "low cost", "sustainability", "acceptability", "feasibility", "relevance" and others). The popularity of the CHNRI method in setting health research priorities can be attributed to several key conceptual advances that have addressed common concerns. The method is systematic in nature, offering an acceptable framework for handling many research questions. It is also transparent and replicable, because it clearly defines the context and priority-setting criteria. It is democratic, as it relies on "crowd-sourcing". It is inclusive, fostering "ownership" of the results by ensuring that various groups invest in the process. It is very flexible and adjustable to many different contexts and needs. Finally, it is simple and relatively inexpensive to conduct, which we believe is one of the main reasons for its uptake by many groups globally, particularly those in low- and middle-income countries.

Developing Responsive Indicators of Indigenous Community Health

PubMed Central

Donatuto, Jamie; Campbell, Larry; Gregory, Robin

2016-01-01

How health is defined and assessed is a priority concern for Indigenous peoples due to considerable health risks faced from environmental impacts to homelands, and because what is “at risk” is often determined without their input or approval. Many health assessments by government agencies, industry, and researchers from outside the communities fail to include Indigenous definitions of health and omit basic methodological guidance on how to evaluate Indigenous health, thus compromising the quality and consistency of results. Native Coast Salish communities (Washington State, USA) developed and pilot-tested a set of Indigenous Health Indicators (IHI) that reflect non-physiological aspects of health (community connection, natural resources security, cultural use, education, self-determination, resilience) on a community scale, using constructed measures that allow for concerns and priorities to be clearly articulated without releasing proprietary knowledge. Based on initial results from pilot-tests of the IHI with the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community (Washington State, USA), we argue that incorporation of IHIs into health assessments will provide a more comprehensive understanding of Indigenous health concerns, and assist Indigenous peoples to control their own health evaluations. PMID:27618086

An Evaluation of the HVAC Load Potential for Providing Load Balancing Service

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Lu, Ning

This paper investigates the potential of providing aggregated intra-hour load balancing services using heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems. A direct-load control algorithm is presented. A temperature-priority-list method is used to dispatch the HVAC loads optimally to maintain consumer-desired indoor temperatures and load diversity. Realistic intra-hour load balancing signals were used to evaluate the operational characteristics of the HVAC load under different outdoor temperature profiles and different indoor temperature settings. The number of HVAC units needed is also investigated. Modeling results suggest that the number of HVACs needed to provide a {+-}1-MW load balancing service 24 hours a day variesmore » significantly with baseline settings, high and low temperature settings, and the outdoor temperatures. The results demonstrate that the intra-hour load balancing service provided by HVAC loads meet the performance requirements and can become a major source of revenue for load-serving entities where the smart grid infrastructure enables direct load control over the HAVC loads.« less

Priorities for research in miscarriage: a priority setting partnership between people affected by miscarriage and professionals following the James Lind Alliance methodology.

PubMed

Prior, Matthew; Bagness, Carmel; Brewin, Jane; Coomarasamy, Arri; Easthope, Lucy; Hepworth-Jones, Barbara; Hinshaw, Kim; O'Toole, Emily; Orford, Julie; Regan, Lesley; Raine-Fenning, Nick; Shakespeare, Judy; Small, Rachel; Thornton, Jim; Metcalf, Leanne

2017-08-23

To identify and prioritise important research questions for miscarriage. A priority setting partnership using prospective surveys and consensus meetings following methods advocated by the James Lind Alliance. UK. Women and those affected by miscarriage working alongside healthcare professionals. In the initial survey, 1093 participants (932 women who have experienced miscarriage, 8 partners, 17 family members, friends or colleagues, 104 healthcare professionals and eight charitable organisations) submitted 3279 questions. A review of existing literature identified a further 64. Non-questions were removed, and the remaining questions were categorised and summarised into 58 questions. In an interim electronic survey, 2122 respondents chose their top 10 priorities from the 58 summary questions. The 25 highest ranked in the survey were prioritised at a final face-to-face workshop. In summary, the top 10 priorities were ranked as follows: research into preventative treatment, emotional aspects in general, investigation, relevance of pre-existing medical conditions, emotional support as a treatment, importance of lifestyle factors, importance of genetic and chromosomal causes, preconception tests, investigation after different numbers of miscarriage and male causal factors. These results should be the focus of future miscarriage research. Presently, studies are being conducted to address the top priority; however, many other priorities, especially psychological and emotional support, are less well researched areas. We hope our results will encourage both researchers and funders to focus on these priorities. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Identifying educational priorities for occupational therapy students to prepare for mental health practice in Australia and New Zealand: Opinions of practising occupational therapists.

PubMed

Scanlan, Justin Newton; Pépin, Geneviève; Haracz, Kirsti; Ennals, Priscilla; Webster, Jayne S; Meredith, Pamela J; Batten, Rachel; Bowman, Siann; Bonassi, Marianne; Bruce, Rosie

2015-10-01

The effective preparation of occupational therapy students for mental health practice is critical to facilitate positive consumer outcomes, underpin optimal practice and support new graduates' professional identity. This project was established to determine a set of 'educational priorities' for occupational therapy students to prepare them for current (and future) entry-level practice in mental health, from the perspective of mental health occupational therapists in Australia and New Zealand. The study included two phases. In Phase One, participants identified what they considered to be important educational priorities for occupational therapy students to prepare them for practice in mental health. For Phase Two, an 'expert panel' was assembled to review and rank these using a Policy Delphi approach. Eighty-five participants provided educational priorities in Phase One. These were grouped into a total of 149 educational themes. In Phase Two, the expert panel (consisting of 37 occupational therapists from diverse locations and practice settings) prioritised these themes across three Delphi rounds. A final priority list was generated dividing educational themes into three prioritised categories: 29 'Essential', 25 'Important' and 44 'Optional' priorities. Highest-ranked priorities were: clinical reasoning, client-centred practice, therapeutic use of self, functional implications of mental illness, therapeutic use of occupation and mental health fieldwork experience. The priority list developed as part of this project provides additional information to support the review of occupational therapy curricula across Australia and New Zealand to ensure that new graduates are optimally prepared for mental health practice. © 2015 Occupational Therapy Australia.

An application of a proposed framework for formulary listing in low-income countries: the case of Côte d'Ivoire.

PubMed

Diaby, Vakaramoko; Lachaine, Jean

2011-11-01

The General Mutual Benefit Fund for Civil Servants and State Employees of Côte d'Ivoire (MUGEFCI; Mutuelle Générale des Fonctionnaires et Agents de l'État de Côte d'Ivoire) is a health mutual fund providing coverage (medical consultations, laboratory tests and treatment) for its enrolees (government officials and agents). This organization aims to improve its current drug reimbursement process because of budgetary constraints. One method of achieving this is to implement a formulary-listing framework specifically developed for low-income countries. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of developing a new formulary for the MUGEFCI in Côte d'Ivoire, by implementing a formulary-listing framework specifically designed for under-researched settings. The application of this formulary-listing framework (based on multi-criteria decision analysis [MCDA]) consisted of four steps. First, relevant formulary-listing criteria and their levels of variation were identified and weighted according to their importance in the decision making around drug reimbursement. Second, a set of priority treatments to be assessed was determined. Once the treatments eligible for reimbursement were determined, scores were assigned to these treatments according to their performance on the formulary-listing criteria levels. Finally, a composite league table (weighted matrix) was constructed to rank the set of treatments by priority order of reimbursement. A budget-impact analysis (BIA) was also conducted to appraise the economic implications of the new composite drugs league table. The extent to which the new priority list of reimbursable drugs was affordable for the MUGEFCI was then measured. Policy makers in Côte d'Ivoire considered severity of disease and cost effectiveness of treatment to be the most significant criteria for priority reimbursement of drugs. This translated into a general preference for antimalarials, treatments for asthma and antibacterials for urinary tract infection. Moreover, the results of the BIA suggest that the new priority list of reimbursable drugs would be affordable if the real economic impact of drugs per member is less than $US66. Over this threshold, the MUGEFCI would have to select reimbursable drugs according to their rank in the priority list and their respective budget impact per patient (cost per patient). This selection would start from the first treatment, going down the list until the $US66 per patient is exhausted. It was possible to use MCDA to simultaneously consider different decision criteria for drug reimbursement in Côte d'Ivoire; therefore, it is feasible to use MCDA to establish a formulary for low-income countries. The application of this method is a step towards transparency in policy making.

How have systematic priority setting approaches influenced policy making? A synthesis of the current literature.

PubMed

Kapiriri, Lydia; Razavi, Donya

2017-09-01

There is a growing body of literature on systematic approaches to healthcare priority setting from various countries and different levels of decision making. This paper synthesizes the current literature in order to assess the extent to which program budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA), burden of disease & cost-effectiveness analysis (BOD/CEA), multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), and accountability for reasonableness (A4R), are reported to have been institutionalized and influenced policy making and practice. We searched for English language publications on health care priority setting approaches (2000-2017). Our sources of literature included PubMed and Ovid databases (including Embase, Global Health, Medline, PsycINFO, EconLit). Of the four approaches PBMA and A4R were commonly applied in high income countries while BOD/CEA was exclusively applied in low income countries. PBMA and BOD/CEA were most commonly reported to have influenced policy making. The explanations for limited adoption of an approach were related to its complexity, poor policy maker understanding and resource requirements. While systematic approaches have the potential to improve healthcare priority setting; most have not been adopted in routine policy making. The identified barriers call for sustained knowledge exchange between researchers and policy-makers and development of practical guidelines to ensure that these frameworks are more accessible, applicable and sustainable in informing policy making. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Guidance on priority setting in health care (GPS-Health): the inclusion of equity criteria not captured by cost-effectiveness analysis.

PubMed

Norheim, Ole F; Baltussen, Rob; Johri, Mira; Chisholm, Dan; Nord, Erik; Brock, DanW; Carlsson, Per; Cookson, Richard; Daniels, Norman; Danis, Marion; Fleurbaey, Marc; Johansson, Kjell A; Kapiriri, Lydia; Littlejohns, Peter; Mbeeli, Thomas; Rao, Krishna D; Edejer, Tessa Tan-Torres; Wikler, Dan

2014-01-01

This 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).

[The national public discourse on priority setting in health care in German print media].

PubMed

Liesching, Florian; Meyer, Thorsten; Raspe, Heiner

2012-01-01

Germany's Central Ethics Committee of the Federal Chamber of Physicians (FCP) and other relevant national actors called for a public discourse on priority setting in health care. Politicians, members of a Federal Joint Committee and health insurance representatives, however, refused to promote or participate in the establishment of a public discussion. A change to that attitude only became apparent after former FCP President Hoppe's opening speech at the annual FCP assembly in Mainz in 2009. The present paper applies the Sociology of Knowledge Approach to Discourse, implemented through Qualitative Content Analysis and elements of Grounded Theory, to examine the development of the national public discourse in leading German print media. It creates a matrix that represents the discourse development between May 2009 and May 2010 and reflects central actors, their "communicative phenomena" and their interactions. Additionally, the matrix has been extended to cover the period until December 2011. Hoppe's arguments for priority setting in health care are faced with a wide opposition assuming opposing prerequisites and thus demanding alternative remedies. The lack of interaction between the different parties prevents any development of the speakers' positions. Incorrect accounts, reductions and left-outs in the media representation add to this effect. Consequently, the public discussion on priority setting is far from being an evolving rational discourse. Instead, it constitutes an exchange of preformed opposing positions. Copyright © 2012. Published by Elsevier GmbH.

Olly Olly Oxen Free (or Ally Ally in Free): Playing Hide and Seek in Allocating Resources for Child and Youth Health.

PubMed

Hiltz, Mary-Ann; Mitton, Craig; Smith, Neale; Dowling, Laura; Campbell, Matthew; Magee, J Fergall; Gibson, Jennifer L; Gujar, Shashi Ashok; Levy, Adrian

2015-01-01

There are powerful arguments for increased investment in child and youth health. But the extent to which these benefits can be realized is shaped by health institutions' priority setting processes. We asked, "What are the unique features of a pediatric care setting that should influence choice and implementation of a formal priority setting and resource allocation process?" Based on multiple sources of data, we created a "made-for-child-health" lens containing three foci reflective of the distinct features of pediatric care settings: the diversity of child and youth populations, the challenges in measuring outcomes and the complexity of patient and public engagement.

The PTSD Practitioner Registry: An Innovative Tracking, Dissemination, and Support Tool for Providers in Military and Nonmilitary settings

DTIC Science & Technology

2017-10-01

the registry as well as pre- test the proposed registry survey. In Phase II, an RCT is being conducted to evaluate the impact of registry...disorders is a compelling priority for clinicians working with active-duty Warriors and Veterans with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The PTSD...4. 2) Develop and pre- test interview modules (10/14-11/14) 100% complete on 03/15 3) Recruit providers for interview assessments (10/14-03/15)100

Research priorities in health economics and funding for palliative care: views of an international think tank.

PubMed

Harding, Richard; Gomes, Barbara; Foley, Kathleen M; Higginson, Irene J

2009-07-01

At the conclusion of the November 2007 meeting, the assembled international expert group identified the research agenda. The adoption of this agenda would take forward health economic research in palliative care, and generate the necessary data for improved funding decision making, and resource allocation. Recommendations for study included international comparative research into the components of care and settings, evaluative studies, methodologic development and strategies to initiate studies, and make better use of data.

Research priorities of the Canadian chiropractic profession: a consensus study using a modified Delphi technique.

PubMed

French, Simon D; Beliveau, Peter J H; Bruno, Paul; Passmore, Steven R; Hayden, Jill A; Srbely, John; Kawchuk, Greg N

2017-01-01

Research funds are limited and a healthcare profession that supports research activity should establish research priority areas. The study objective was to identify research priority areas for the Canadian chiropractic profession, and for stakeholders in the chiropractic profession to rank these in order of importance. We conducted a modified Delphi consensus study between August 2015 and May 2017 to determine the views of Canadian chiropractic organisations (e.g. Canadian Chiropractic Association; provincial associations) and stakeholder groups (e.g. chiropractic educational institutions; researchers). Participants completed three online Delphi survey rounds. In Round 1, participants suggested research areas within four broad research themes: 1) Basic science; 2) Clinical; 3) Health services; and 4) Population health. In Round 2, researchers created sub-themes by categorising the areas suggested in Round 1, and participants judged the importance of the research sub-themes. We defined consensus as at least 70% of participants agreeing that a research area was "essential" or "very important". In Round 3, results from Round 2 were presented to the participants to re-evaluate the importance of sub-themes. Finally, participants completed an online pairwise ranking activity to determine the rank order of the list of important research sub-themes. Fifty-seven participants, of 85 people invited, completed Round 1 (response rate 67%). Fifty-six participants completed Round 2, 55 completed Round 3, and 53 completed the ranking activity. After three Delphi rounds and the pairwise ranking activity was completed, the ranked list of research sub-themes considered important were: 1) Integration of chiropractic care into multidisciplinary settings; 2) Costs and cost-effectiveness of chiropractic care; 3) Effect of chiropractic care on reducing medical services; 4) Effects of chiropractic care; 5) Safety/side effects of chiropractic care; 6) Chiropractic care for older adults; 7) Neurophysiological mechanisms and effects of spinal manipulative therapy; 8) General mechanisms and effects of spinal manipulative therapy. This project identified research priority areas for the Canadian chiropractic profession. The top three priority areas were all in the area of health services research: 1) Integration of chiropractic care into multidisciplinary settings; 2) Costs and cost-effectiveness of chiropractic care; 3) Effect of chiropractic care on reducing medical services.

First Destination Transportation Study

DTIC Science & Technology

1978-03-03

avoidance potentials on a daily procurement basis. A "total" sys- tematic cost evaluation program, including specific de - cision rules needed on an...implementation priority :x needed. The rec- ommended priority is as follows: [ (1) Develop improved system management concepts that will "form the framework ...priority as it provides the overall framework for better system management. Cost evaluation and CCSS Enhancement Programs deserve next consideration, as

Evaluation of community pharmacy-based services for type-2 diabetes in an Indonesian setting: pharmacist survey.

PubMed

Wibowo, Yosi; Parsons, Richard; Sunderland, Bruce; Hughes, Jeffery

2015-10-01

Diabetes is an emerging chronic disease in developing countries. Currently the management of diabetes in developing countries is mainly hospital or clinic based. With burgeoning numbers of patients with diabetes, other models need to be evaluated for service delivery in developing countries. Community pharmacists are an important option for provision of diabetes care. Currently, data regarding practices of community pharmacists in diabetes care have been limited to developed countries. To evaluate current community pharmacy-based services and perceived roles of pharmacists in type 2 diabetes care, and characteristics (pharmacist and pharmacy) associated with current practice. Community pharmacies in a developing country setting (Surabaya, Indonesia). A questionnaire was administered to pharmacists managing a random sample of 400 community pharmacies in Surabaya, Indonesia. Current practice and pharmacists' perceived roles were rated using Likert scales, whilst an open-ended question was used to identify priority roles. Logistic regression models determined characteristics associated with current practice. A response rate of 60% was achieved. Dispensing (100%) and education on how to use medications (72.6%) were common current pharmacy practices. More than 50% of pharmacists were supportive towards providing additional services beyond dispensing. The highest priorities for services beyond dispensing were education on medications [i.e. directions for use (58.6%) and common/important adverse effects (25.7%)], education on exercise (36.5%), education on diet (47.7%), and monitoring medication compliance (27.9%). Facilitators identified were: being perceived as part of a pharmacist's role (for all priority services), pharmacies with more than 50 diabetes customers per month (for diet education), and pharmacists' involvement in diabetes training (for compliance monitoring). The key barrier identified was lower pharmacist availability (for diet education as well as compliance monitoring). Most community pharmacies in Surabaya, Indonesia have only provided a basic service of dispensing for type 2 diabetes patients. Many pharmacists believed that they should extend their roles particularly regarding patient education and monitoring. The development of pharmacist professional roles would assist in managing the burgeoning burden of diabetes. The identified facilitators/barriers provide baseline data to support the development of community pharmacy-based diabetes services.

An empirical Bayes safety evaluation of tram/streetcar signal and lane priority measures in Melbourne.

PubMed

Naznin, Farhana; Currie, Graham; Sarvi, Majid; Logan, David

2016-01-01

Streetcars/tram systems are growing worldwide, and many are given priority to increase speed and reliability performance in mixed traffic conditions. Research related to the road safety impact of tram priority is limited. This study explores the road safety impacts of tram priority measures including lane and intersection/signal priority measures. A before-after crash study was conducted using the empirical Bayes (EB) method to provide more accurate crash impact estimates by accounting for wider crash trends and regression to the mean effects. Before-after crash data for 29 intersections with tram signal priority and 23 arterials with tram lane priority in Melbourne, Australia, were analyzed to evaluate the road safety impact of tram priority. The EB before-after analysis results indicated a statistically significant adjusted crash reduction rate of 16.4% after implementation of tram priority measures. Signal priority measures were found to reduce crashes by 13.9% and lane priority by 19.4%. A disaggregate level simple before-after analysis indicated reductions in total and serious crashes as well as vehicle-, pedestrian-, and motorcycle-involved crashes. In addition, reductions in on-path crashes, pedestrian-involved crashes, and collisions among vehicles moving in the same and opposite directions and all other specific crash types were found after tram priority implementation. Results suggest that streetcar/tram priority measures result in safety benefits for all road users, including vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists. Policy implications and areas for future research are discussed.

Research priority setting in Barrett's oesophagus and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

PubMed

Britton, James; Gadeke, Lisa; Lovat, Laurence; Hamdy, Shaheen; Hawkey, Chris; McLaughlin, John; Ang, Yeng

2017-11-01

The incidence of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and Barrett's oesophagus is increasing. Barrett's oesophagus is the main precursor to oesophageal adenocarcinoma, which has a poor prognosis. In view of the vast potential burden of these diseases on patients and health-care resources, there is a real need to define and focus research efforts. This priority setting exercise aimed to produce a list of the top ten uncertainties in the field that reflect the priorities of patients and health-care providers. We adopted the robust and transparent methodologies previously outlined by the James Lind Alliance. This qualitative approach firstly involves an ideas gathering survey that, once distilled, generates a longlist of research uncertainties. These uncertainties are then prioritised via an interim ranking survey and a final workshop to achieve consensus agreement. The initial 629 uncertainties, generated from a survey of 170 individual respondents (47% professional, 53% non-professional) and one workshop, were narrowed down to the final top ten uncertainties of priority for future research. These priorities covered a range of issues, including a need for improved patient risk stratification, alternative diagnostic and surveillance tests, efficacy of a dedicated service for Barrett's oesophagus, cost-effectiveness and appropriateness of current surveillance, advances in development of non-drug treatments for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, safety of long-term drug treatment, and questions regarding the durability and role of different endoscopic therapies for dysplastic Barrett's oesophagus. This is the first patient-centred assessment of priorities for researchers in this chronic disease setting. We hope that recognition and dissemination of these results will shape the future direction of research and translate into meaningful gains for patients. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Nurse practitioners in aged care: documentary analysis of successful project proposals.

PubMed

Clark, Shannon J; Parker, Rhian M; Davey, Rachel

2014-11-01

Meeting the primary health care needs of an aging population is an increasing challenge for many Western nations. In Australia, the federal government introduced a program to develop, test, and evaluate nurse practitioner models in aged care settings. In this article, we present a documentary analysis of 32 project proposals awarded funding under the Nurse Practitioner-Aged Care Models of Practice Program. Successfully funded models were diverse and were operated by a range of organizations across Australia. We identified three key priorities as underlying the proposed models: "The right care," "in the right place," and "at the right time." In this article, we explore how these priorities were presented by different applicants in different ways. Through the presentation of their models, the program's applicants identified and proposed to address current gaps in health services. Applicants contrasted their proposed models with available services to create persuasive and competitive applications for funding. © The Author(s) 2014.

Prioritizing conservation investments for mammal species globally

PubMed Central

Wilson, Kerrie A.; Evans, Megan C.; Di Marco, Moreno; Green, David C.; Boitani, Luigi; Possingham, Hugh P.; Chiozza, Federica; Rondinini, Carlo

2011-01-01

We need to set priorities for conservation because we cannot do everything, everywhere, at the same time. We determined priority areas for investment in threat abatement actions, in both a cost-effective and spatially and temporally explicit way, for the threatened mammals of the world. Our analysis presents the first fine-resolution prioritization analysis for mammals at a global scale that accounts for the risk of habitat loss, the actions required to abate this risk, the costs of these actions and the likelihood of investment success. We evaluated the likelihood of success of investments using information on the past frequency and duration of legislative effectiveness at a country scale. The establishment of new protected areas was the action receiving the greatest investment, while restoration was never chosen. The resolution of the analysis and the incorporation of likelihood of success made little difference to this result, but affected the spatial location of these investments. PMID:21844046

75 FR 8854 - Teacher Incentive Fund Program

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-02-26

...The Secretary of Education (Secretary) proposes priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria under the Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF) program. These proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria are designed to be used in two separate and distinct TIF grant competitions: The Main TIF competition, which will provide TIF funding to eligible entities to support their implementation of performance-based compensation systems (PBCSs) in accordance with the priorities, the Main TIF requirements, the definitions, and the selection criteria proposed in this document, and the TIF Evaluation competition, which will provide, in accordance with the priorities, the Main TIF requirements, the definitions, and the selection criteria as well as the Evaluation requirements proposed in this document, TIF funding to help pay for the costs of implementing these eligible entities' PBCS in exchange for an agreement to participate in the national evaluation. The Secretary may use these proposed TIF priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria in fiscal year (FY) 2010 and subsequent years. We intend the proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria to improve student achievement in high-need schools by creating incentives for effective teachers and principals in these schools.

Prioritizing Surgical Care on National Health Agendas: A Qualitative Case Study of Papua New Guinea, Uganda, and Sierra Leone

PubMed Central

Dare, Anna J.; Lee, Katherine C.; Bleicher, Josh; Elobu, Alex E.; Kamara, Thaim B.; Liko, Osborne; Luboga, Samuel; Danlop, Akule; Kune, Gabriel; Hagander, Lars; Leather, Andrew J. M.; Yamey, Gavin

2016-01-01

Background Little is known about the social and political factors that influence priority setting for different health services in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), yet these factors are integral to understanding how national health agendas are established. We investigated factors that facilitate or prevent surgical care from being prioritized in LMICs. Methods and Findings We undertook country case studies in Papua New Guinea, Uganda, and Sierra Leone, using a qualitative process-tracing method. We conducted 74 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders involved in health agenda setting and surgical care in these countries. Interviews were triangulated with published academic literature, country reports, national health plans, and policies. Data were analyzed using a conceptual framework based on four components (actor power, ideas, political contexts, issue characteristics) to assess national factors influencing priority for surgery. Political priority for surgical care in the three countries varies. Priority was highest in Papua New Guinea, where surgical care is firmly embedded within national health plans and receives significant domestic and international resources, and much lower in Uganda and Sierra Leone. Factors influencing whether surgical care was prioritized were the degree of sustained and effective domestic advocacy by the local surgical community, the national political and economic environment in which health policy setting occurs, and the influence of international actors, particularly donors, on national agenda setting. The results from Papua New Guinea show that a strong surgical community can generate priority from the ground up, even where other factors are unfavorable. Conclusions National health agenda setting is a complex social and political process. To embed surgical care within national health policy, sustained advocacy efforts, effective framing of the problem and solutions, and country-specific data are required. Political, technical, and financial support from regional and international partners is also important. PMID:27186645

Political strategies in difficult times - The "backstage" experience of Swedish politicians on formal priority setting in healthcare.

PubMed

Garpenby, Peter; Nedlund, Ann-Charlotte

2016-08-01

This paper contributes to the knowledge on the governing of healthcare in a democratic context in times of austerity. Resource allocation in healthcare is a highly political issue but the political nature of healthcare is not always made clear and the role of politicians is often obscure. The absence of politicians in rationing/disinvestment arrangements is usually explained with blame-shifting arguments; they prefer to delegate "the burden of responsibility" to administrative agencies or professionals. Drawing on a case where Swedish regional politicians involved themselves in setting priorities at a more detailed level than previously, the findings suggest that the subject of "blame avoidance" is more complicated than usually assumed. A qualitative case study was designed, involving semi-structured interviews with 14 regionally elected politicians in one Swedish health authority, conducted in June 2011. The interviews were analysed through a thematic analysis in accordance with the "framework approach" by Ritchie and Lewis. Findings show that an overarching strategy among the politicians was to appear united and to suppress conflict, which served to underpin the vital strategy of bringing the medical profession into the process. A key finding is the importance that politicians, when appearing "backstage", attach to the prevention of blame from the medical profession. This case illustrates that one has to take into account that priority settings requires various types of skills and knowledges - not only technical but also political and social. Another important lesson points toward the need to broaden the political leadership repertoire, as leadership in the case of priority setting is not about politicians being all in or all out. The results suggest that in a priority-setting process it is of importance to have politics on-board at an early stage to secure loyalty to the process, although not necessarily being involved in all details. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Hidden Costs: the ethics of cost-effectiveness analyses for health interventions in resource-limited settings

PubMed Central

Rutstein, Sarah E.; Price, Joan T.; Rosenberg, Nora E.; Rennie, Stuart M.; Biddle, Andrea K.; Miller, William C.

2017-01-01

Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is an increasingly appealing tool for evaluating and comparing health-related interventions in resource-limited settings. The goal is to inform decision-makers regarding the health benefits and associated costs of alternative interventions, helping guide allocation of limited resources by prioritizing interventions that offer the most health for the least money. Although only one component of a more complex decision-making process, CEAs influence the distribution of healthcare resources, directly influencing morbidity and mortality for the world’s most vulnerable populations. However, CEA-associated measures are frequently setting-specific valuations, and CEA outcomes may violate ethical principles of equity and distributive justice. We examine the assumptions and analytical tools used in CEAs that may conflict with societal values. We then evaluate contextual features unique to resource-limited settings, including the source of health-state utilities and disability weights; implications of CEA thresholds in light of economic uncertainty; and the role of external donors. Finally, we explore opportunities to help align interpretation of CEA outcomes with values and budgetary constraints in resource-limited settings. The ethical implications of CEAs in resource-limited settings are vast. It is imperative that CEA outcome summary measures and implementation thresholds adequately reflect societal values and ethical priorities in resource-limited settings. PMID:27141969

Hidden costs: The ethics of cost-effectiveness analyses for health interventions in resource-limited settings.

PubMed

Rutstein, Sarah E; Price, Joan T; Rosenberg, Nora E; Rennie, Stuart M; Biddle, Andrea K; Miller, William C

2017-10-01

Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is an increasingly appealing tool for evaluating and comparing health-related interventions in resource-limited settings. The goal is to inform decision-makers regarding the health benefits and associated costs of alternative interventions, helping guide allocation of limited resources by prioritising interventions that offer the most health for the least money. Although only one component of a more complex decision-making process, CEAs influence the distribution of health-care resources, directly influencing morbidity and mortality for the world's most vulnerable populations. However, CEA-associated measures are frequently setting-specific valuations, and CEA outcomes may violate ethical principles of equity and distributive justice. We examine the assumptions and analytical tools used in CEAs that may conflict with societal values. We then evaluate contextual features unique to resource-limited settings, including the source of health-state utilities and disability weights, implications of CEA thresholds in light of economic uncertainty, and the role of external donors. Finally, we explore opportunities to help align interpretation of CEA outcomes with values and budgetary constraints in resource-limited settings. The ethical implications of CEAs in resource-limited settings are vast. It is imperative that CEA outcome summary measures and implementation thresholds adequately reflect societal values and ethical priorities in resource-limited settings.

Exploring stakeholders' views of medical education research priorities: a national survey.

PubMed

Dennis, Ashley A; Cleland, Jennifer A; Johnston, Peter; Ker, Jean S; Lough, Murray; Rees, Charlotte E

2014-11-01

Setting research priorities is important when exploring complex issues with limited resources. Only two countries (Canada and New Zealand) have previously conducted priority-setting exercises for medical education research (MER). This study aimed to identify the views of multiple stakeholders on MER priorities in Scotland. This study utilised a two-stage design to explore the views of stakeholders across the medical education continuum using online questionnaires. In Stage 1, key informants outlined their top three MER priorities and justified their choices. In Stage 2, participants rated 21 topics generated in Stage 1 according to importance and identified or justified their top priorities. A combination of qualitative (i.e. framework analysis) and quantitative (e.g. exploratory factor analysis) data analyses were employed. Views were gathered from over 1300 stakeholders. A total of 21 subthemes (or priority areas) identified in Stage 1 were explored further in Stage 2. The 21 items loaded onto five factors: the culture of learning together in the workplace; enhancing and valuing the role of educators; curriculum integration and innovation; bridging the gap between assessment and feedback, and building a resilient workforce. Within Stage 2, the top priority subthemes were: balancing conflicts between service and training; providing useful feedback; promoting resiliency and well-being; creating an effective workplace learning culture; selecting and recruiting doctors to reflect need, and ensuring that curricula prepare trainees for practice. Participant characteristics were related to the perceived importance of the factors. Finally, five themes explaining why participants prioritised items were identified: patient safety; quality of care; investing for the future; policy and political agendas, and evidence-based education. This study indicates that, across the spectrum of stakeholders and geography, certain MER priorities are consistently identified. These priority areas are in harmony with a range of current drivers in UK medical education. They provide a platform of evidence on which to base decisions about MER programmes in Scotland and beyond. © 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Development of tuberculosis infection control guidelines in a pediatric HIV clinic in sub-Saharan Africa.

PubMed

Carlucci, J G; Jin, L; Sanders, J E; Mohapi, E Q; Mandalakas, A M

2015-03-21

A well-established pediatric human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) clinic in Lesotho with initial infection control (IC) measures prioritizing blood-borne disease. In line with international recommendations, services have been expanded to include the management of patients with tuberculosis (TB). The creation of comprehensive IC guidelines with an emphasis on TB has become a priority. To provide a model for developing and implementing IC guidelines in ambulatory care facilities in limited-resource settings with high HIV and TB prevalence. Activities: An IC plan that includes guidance covering both general IC measures and TB-specific guidelines was created by integrating local and international recommendations and emphasizing the importance of administrative measures, environmental controls, and disease-specific precautions. An interdisciplinary committee was established to oversee its implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. Development and implementation of IC guidelines in resource-limited settings are feasible and should be a priority in high HIV and TB prevalence areas. Education should be the cornerstone of such endeavors. Many interventions can be implemented with minimal expertise and material resources. Administrative support and institutional investment are essential to the sustainability of an effective IC program.

Health literacy and chronic disease management: drawing from expert knowledge to set an agenda

PubMed Central

Poureslami, Iraj; Nimmon, Laura; Rootman, Irving; Fitzgerald, Mark J.

2017-01-01

Summary Understanding the nature and impact of health literacy is a priority in health promotion and chronic disease prevention and treatment. Health literacy comprises the application of a broad set of skills to access, comprehend, evaluate, communicate and act on health information for improved health and well-being. A complex concept, it involves multiple participants and is enacted across a wide variety of contexts. Health literacy's complexity has given rise to challenges achieving a standard definition and developing means to measure all its dimensions. In May 2013, a group of health literacy experts, clinicians and policymakers convened at an Expert Roundtable to review the current state of health literacy research and practice, and make recommendations about refining its definition, expanding its measurement and integrating best practices into chronic disease management. The four-day knowledge exchange concluded that the successful integration of health literacy into policy and practice depends on the development of a more substantial evidence base. A review of the successes and gaps in health literacy research, education and interventions culminated in the identification of key priorities to further the health literacy agenda. The workshop was funded by the UBC Peter Wall Institute for Advanced Studies, Vancouver. PMID:26873913

Goal setting practice in services delivering community-based stroke rehabilitation: a United Kingdom (UK) wide survey.

PubMed

Scobbie, Lesley; Duncan, Edward A; Brady, Marian C; Wyke, Sally

2015-01-01

We investigated the nature of services providing community-based stroke rehabilitation across the UK, and goal setting practice used within them, to inform evaluation of a goal setting and action planning (G-AP) framework. We designed, piloted and electronically distributed a survey to health professionals working in community-based stroke rehabilitation settings across the UK. We optimised recruitment using a multi-faceted strategy. Responses were analysed from 437 services. Services size, composition and input was highly variable; however, most were multi-disciplinary (82%; n = 335/407) and provided input to a mixed diagnostic group of patients (71%; n = 312/437). Ninety one percent of services (n = 358/395) reported setting goals with "all" or "most" stroke survivors. Seventeen percent (n = 65/380) reported that no methods were used to guide goal setting practice; 47% (n = 148/315) reported use of informal methods only. Goal setting practice varied, e.g. 98% of services (n = 362/369) reported routinely asking patients about goal priorities; 39% (n = 141/360) reported routinely providing patients with a copy of their goals. Goal setting is embedded within community-based stroke rehabilitation; however, practice varies and is potentially sub-optimal. Further evaluation of the G-AP framework is warranted to inform optimal practice. Evaluation design will take account of the diverse service models that exist. Implications for Rehabilitation Community-based stroke rehabilitation services across the UK are diverse and tend to see a mixed diagnostic group of patients. Goal setting is implemented routinely within community-based stroke rehabilitation services; however, practice is variable and potentially sub-optimal. Further evaluation of the G-AP framework is warranted to assess its effectiveness in practice.

Methodological Pluralism: The Gold Standard of STEM Evaluation

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Lawrenz, Frances; Huffman, Douglas

2006-01-01

Nationally, there is continuing debate about appropriate methods for conducting educational evaluations. The U.S. Department of Education has placed a priority on "scientifically" based evaluation methods and has advocated a "gold standard" of randomized controlled experimentation. The priority suggests that randomized control methods are best,…

Patient inducement, provider priorities, and resource allocation in public mental health systems.

PubMed

Sinaiko, Anna D; McGuire, Thomas G

2006-12-01

Public mental health systems are increasingly facing demands from the criminal justice system and social services agencies to provide services and support in cases in which mental illness contributes to crime, homelessness, or poverty. In this article we analyze how policies from outside public mental health systems affect resource allocation within these systems, using examples from criminal justice. These policies use two types of mechanisms: inducing patients to consume treatment (by offering rewards or imposing penalties) and inducing clinicians to provide treatment (by creating priorities). We propose a classification of these social policies based on whether they affect demand through rewards or penalties or supply through priorities. We then relate the classification to data on patients treated in public systems to evaluate the current prevalence and potential for growth in these outside demands. These inducements impose a set of nonobvious costs on other patients who are not targeted by the policies. Furthermore, they create incentives for both patients and providers to modify their behavior in order to take advantage of rewards, avoid penalties, or better compete for resources with prioritized patients. We consider some policy implications for avoiding unintended consequences of these policies.

Completeness of tuberculosis reporting forms for disease control in individuals with HIV/AIDS in priority cities of Bahia state.

PubMed

Lírio, Monique; dos Santos, Normeide Pedreira; Passos, Louran Andrade Reis; Kritski, Afrânio; Galvão-Castro, Bernardo; Grassi, Maria Fernanda Rios

2015-04-01

The control of HIV / Tuberculosis (TB) co -infection remains a challenge for public health. Notification is mandatory for both diseases and the National Case Registry Database (Sinan) is responsible for the collection and processing of individual forms of reporting and monitoring. The adequate fulfillment of these fields chips (completeness) is essential to follow the dynamics of the disease and set priorities for intervention. The aim of this study was to evaluate the completeness of the notification forms of tuberculosis in the priority municipalities of Bahia (Camaçari , Feira de Santana , Ilhéus , Itabuna, Jequié, Lauro de Freitas , Porto Seguro , Teixeira de Freitas , Paulo Afonso, Barreiras and Salvador) to control the disease in individuals with HIV/AIDS using tabulations obtained from the Sinan in the period from 2001 to 2010. The results showed that despite the completeness of the field HIV be above 50 %, more than half the cases were met as "undone" or "being processed" in all municipalities assessed in the period. The low completeness of reporting forms may compromise the quality of surveillance of TB cases. The results suggest the need for greater availability of HIV testing in these individuals.

[Experience of the implementation of the method of the integral assessment of drinking water on indicators of chemical harmlessness in St. Petersburg].

PubMed

Mel'tser, A V; Erastova, N V; Kiselev, A V

2013-01-01

Providing population with quality drinking water--one of the priority tasks of the state policy aimed at maintaining the health of citizens. Hygienic rating of the drinking water quality envisages requirements to assurance its safety in the epidemiological and radiation relations, harmlessness of chemical composition and good organoleptic properties. There are numerous data proving the relationship between the chemical composition of drinking water and human health, and therefore the issue of taking a hygienically sound measures to improve the efficiency of water treatment has more and more priority. High water quality--the result of complex solution of tasks, including an integral approach to assessment of the quality of drinking water the use of hygienically sound decisions in the modernization of water treatment systems. The results of the integral assessment of drinking water on the properties of harmlessness have shown its actuality in the development and implementation of management decisions. The use of the spatial characteristics of integrated indices permits to visualize changes in the quality of drinking water in all stages of production and transportation from the position of health risks, evaluate the effectiveness of technological solutions and set priorities for investing.

The implications of fundamental cause theory for priority setting.

PubMed

Goldberg, Daniel S

2014-10-01

Application of fundamental cause theory to Powers and Faden's model of social justice highlights the ethical superiority of upstream public health interventions. In this article, I assess the ramifications of fundamental cause theory specifically in context of public health priority setting. Ethically optimal public health policy simultaneously maximizes overall population health and compresses health inequalities. The fundamental cause theory is an important framework in helping to identify which categories of public health interventions are most likely to advance these twin goals.

Disease management index of potential years of life lost as a tool for setting priorities in national disease control using OECD health data.

PubMed

Jang, Sung-In; Nam, Jung-Mo; Choi, Jongwon; Park, Eun-Cheol

2014-03-01

Limited healthcare resources make it necessary to maximize efficiency in disease management at the country level by priority-setting according to disease burden. To make the best priority settings, it is necessary to measure health status and have standards for its judgment, as well as consider disease management trends among nations. We used 17 International Classification of Diseases (ICD) categories of potential years of life lost (YPLL) from Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) health data for 2012, 37 disease diagnoses YPLL from OECD health data for 2009 across 22 countries and disability-adjusted life years (DALY) from the World Health Organization (WHO). We set a range of 1-1 for each YPLL per disease in a nation (position value for relative comparison, PARC). Changes over 5 years were also accounted for in this disease management index (disease management index, DMI). In terms of ICD categories, the DMI indicated specific areas for priority setting for different countries with regard to managing disease treatment and diagnosis. Our study suggests that DMI is a realistic index that reflects trend changes over the past 5 years to the present state, and PARC is an easy index for identifying relative status. Moreover, unlike existing indices, DMI and PARC make it easy to conduct multiple comparisons among countries and diseases. DMI and PARC are therefore useful tools for policy implications and for future studies incorporating them and other existing indexes. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Stakeholder Priorities for Comparative Effectiveness Research in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

PubMed Central

Lindenauer, Peter K.; Au, David H.; Carson, Shannon S.; Lee, Todd A.; McBurnie, Mary Ann; Naureckas, Edward T.; Vollmer, William M.; Mularski, Richard A.

2013-01-01

Comparative effectiveness research (CER) is intended to address the expressed needs of patients, clinicians, and other stakeholders. Representatives of 54 stakeholder groups with an interest in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) participated in workshops convened by the COPD Outcomes-based Network for Clinical Effectiveness and Research Translation (CONCERT) over a 2-year period. Year 1 focused on chronic care and care coordination. Year 2 focused on acute care and transitions in care between healthcare settings. Discussions and provisional voting were conducted via teleconferences and e-mail exchanges before the workshop. Final prioritization votes occurred after in-person discussions at the workshop. We used a modified Delphi approach to facilitate discussions and consensus building. To more easily quantify preferences and to evaluate the internal consistency of rankings, the Analytic Hierarchy Process was incorporated in Year 2. Results of preworkshop and final workshop voting often differed, suggesting that prioritization efforts relying solely on requests for topics from stakeholder groups without in-person discussion may provide different research priorities. Research priorities varied across stakeholder groups, but generally focused on studies to evaluate different approaches to healthcare delivery (e.g., spirometry for diagnosis and treatment, integrated healthcare strategies during transitions in care) rather than head-to-head comparisons of medications. This research agenda may help to inform groups intending to respond to CER funding opportunities in COPD. The methodologies used, detailed in the online supplement, may also help to inform prioritization efforts for CER in other health conditions. PMID:23155144

Setting high-impact clinical research priorities for the Society for Vascular Surgery.

PubMed

Kraiss, Larry W; Conte, Michael S; Geary, Randolph L; Kibbe, Melina; Ozaki, C Keith

2013-02-01

With the overall goal of enhancing the effectiveness and efficiency of vascular care, the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) recently completed a process by which it identified its top clinical research priorities to address critical gaps in knowledge guiding practitioners in prevention and treatment of vascular disease. After a survey of the SVS membership, a panel of SVS committee members and opinion leaders considered 53 distinct research questions through a structured process that resulted in identification of nine clinical issues that were felt to merit immediate attention by vascular investigators and external funding agencies. These are, in order of priority: (1) define optimal management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis, (2) compare the effectiveness of medical vs invasive treatment (open or endovascular) of vasculogenic claudication, (3) compare effectiveness of open vs endovascular infrainguinal revascularization as initial treatment of critical limb ischemia, (4) develop and compare the effectiveness of clinical strategies to reduce cardiovascular and other perioperative complications (eg, wound) after vascular intervention, (5) compare the effectiveness of strategies to enhance arteriovenous fistula maturation and durability, (6) develop best practices for management of chronic venous ulcer, (7) define optimal adjunctive medical therapy to enhance the success of lower extremity revascularization, (8) identify and evaluate medical therapy to prevent abdominal aortic aneurysm growth, and (9) evaluate ultrasound vs computed tomographic angiography surveillance after endovascular aneurysm repair. Copyright © 2013 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Stakeholder priorities for comparative effectiveness research in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a workshop report.

PubMed

Krishnan, Jerry A; Lindenauer, Peter K; Au, David H; Carson, Shannon S; Lee, Todd A; McBurnie, Mary Ann; Naureckas, Edward T; Vollmer, William M; Mularski, Richard A

2013-02-01

Comparative effectiveness research (CER) is intended to address the expressed needs of patients, clinicians, and other stakeholders. Representatives of 54 stakeholder groups with an interest in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) participated in workshops convened by the COPD Outcomes-based Network for Clinical Effectiveness and Research Translation (CONCERT) over a 2-year period. Year 1 focused on chronic care and care coordination. Year 2 focused on acute care and transitions in care between healthcare settings. Discussions and provisional voting were conducted via teleconferences and e-mail exchanges before the workshop. Final prioritization votes occurred after in-person discussions at the workshop. We used a modified Delphi approach to facilitate discussions and consensus building. To more easily quantify preferences and to evaluate the internal consistency of rankings, the Analytic Hierarchy Process was incorporated in Year 2. Results of preworkshop and final workshop voting often differed, suggesting that prioritization efforts relying solely on requests for topics from stakeholder groups without in-person discussion may provide different research priorities. Research priorities varied across stakeholder groups, but generally focused on studies to evaluate different approaches to healthcare delivery (e.g., spirometry for diagnosis and treatment, integrated healthcare strategies during transitions in care) rather than head-to-head comparisons of medications. This research agenda may help to inform groups intending to respond to CER funding opportunities in COPD. The methodologies used, detailed in the online supplement, may also help to inform prioritization efforts for CER in other health conditions.

Considerations for an Obesity Policy Research Agenda

PubMed Central

McKinnon, Robin A.; Orleans, C. Tracy; Kumanyika, Shiriki K.; Haire-Joshu, Debra; Krebs-Smith, Susan M.; Finkelstein, Eric A.; Brownell, Kelly D.; Thompson, Joseph W.; Ballard-Barbash, Rachel

2010-01-01

The rise in obesity levels in the U.S. in the past several decades has been dramatic, with serious implications for public health and the economy. Experiences in tobacco control and other public health initiatives have shown that public policy may be a powerful tool to effect structural change to alter population-level behavior. In 2007, the National Cancer Institute convened a meeting to discuss priorities for a research agenda to inform obesity policy. Issues considered were how to define obesity policy research, key challenges and key partners in formulating/implementing an obesity policy research agenda, criteria by which to set research priorities, and specific research needs and questions. Themes that emerged were: (1) the embryonic nature of obesity policy research, (2) the need to study “natural experiments” resulting from policy-based efforts to address the obesity epidemic, (3) the importance of research focused beyond individual-level behavior change, (4) the need for economic research across several relevant policy areas, and (5) the overall urgency of taking action in the policy arena. Moving forward, timely evaluation of natural experiments is of especially high priority. A variety of policies intended to promote healthy weight in children and adults are being implemented in communities and at the state and national levels. Although some of these policies are supported by the findings of intervention research, additional research is needed to evaluate the implementation and quantify the impact of new policies designed to address obesity. PMID:19211215

A movement, a spirit, a lifestyle change.

PubMed

Eberlee, J

1994-04-01

The Philippines' Department of Health (DOH) has found that young children face the most risk of pneumonia and other respiratory infections. Those from areas not served by physicians face the greatest risk. During the 1980s, DOH set up a 5-year pilot project in 8 rural areas in the southern Philippines to see whether midwives could diagnose and treat acute respiratory infections (ARIs). The midwives used a simple diagnostic method (WHO/ARI algorithm) based on two ARI signs: a respiratory rate of at least 50 breaths/minute and an indrawn chest. An indrawn chest indicated a need to refer a child to the hospital. The midwives did well at diagnosing and treating ARIs. DOH has since introduced the algorithm nationwide. This research addressed an important problem and was well planned and implemented. IDRC and the Council on Health Research for Development in Geneva sponsors the Essential National Health Research (ENHR) initiative in the Philippines. The ENHR strategy aims to better people's health by establishing priorities among different health problems. After priority setting, a participatory process involving communities, researchers, and policy and decision makers determines the relevant research questions. ENHR should result in better, more effective, and more equitable health care and reduce the burden of illness. The first ENHR agenda includes the following research priorities: impact of indigenous beliefs and practices on health; baseline epidemiologic studies on mental health problems; infectious diseases (especially tuberculosis); evaluation of implementation of national health programs; and development of strategies to encourage rational use of drugs in hospitals. It took more than 2 years to agree on these priorities--a complicated and democratic process. The next step is to obtain funding for these projects. The ENHR project wants to attempt advocacy work--creating demand for research and preparing policy makers for the data. Its goal is to be a catalyst in the revolution of health research.

Prioritising patients for bariatric surgery: building public preferences from a discrete choice experiment into public policy

PubMed Central

Whitty, Jennifer A; Ratcliffe, Julie; Kendall, Elizabeth; Burton, Paul; Wilson, Andrew; Littlejohns, Peter; Harris, Paul; Krinks, Rachael; Scuffham, Paul A

2015-01-01

Objectives To derive priority weights for access to bariatric surgery for obese adults, from the perspective of the public. Setting Australian public hospital system. Participants Adults (N=1994), reflecting the age and gender distribution of Queensland and South Australia. Primary and secondary outcome measures A discrete choice experiment in which respondents indicated which of two individuals with different characteristics should be prioritised for surgery in repeated hypothetical choices. Potential surgery recipients were described by seven key characteristics or attributes: body mass index (BMI), presence of comorbid conditions, age, family history, commitment to lifestyle change, time on the surgical wait list and chance of maintaining weight loss following surgery. A multinomial logit model was used to evaluate preferences and derive priority weights (primary analysis), with a latent class model used to explore respondent characteristics that were associated with variation in preference across the sample (see online supplementary analysis). Results A preference was observed to prioritise individuals who demonstrated a strong commitment to maintaining a healthy lifestyle as well as individuals categorised with very severe (BMI≥50 kg/m2) or (to a lesser extent) severe (BMI≥40 kg/m2) obesity, those who already have obesity-related comorbidity, with a family history of obesity, with a greater chance of maintaining weight loss or who had spent a longer time on the wait list. Lifestyle commitment was considered to be more than twice as important as any other criterion. There was little tendency to prioritise according to the age of the recipient. Respondent preferences were dependent on their BMI, previous experience with weight management surgery, current health state and education level. Conclusions This study extends our understanding of the publics’ preferences for priority setting to the context of bariatric surgery, and derives priority weights that could be used to assist bodies responsible for commissioning bariatric services. PMID:26474940

Can streamlined multi-criteria decision analysis be used to implement shared decision making for colorectal cancer screening?

PubMed Central

Dolan, James G.; Boohaker, Emily; Allison, Jeroan; Imperiale, Thomas F.

2013-01-01

Background Current US colorectal cancer screening guidelines that call for shared decision making regarding the choice among several recommended screening options are difficult to implement. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is an established methodology well suited for supporting shared decision making. Our study goal was to determine if a streamlined form of MCDA using rank order based judgments can accurately assess patients’ colorectal cancer screening priorities. Methods We converted priorities for four decision criteria and three sub-criteria regarding colorectal cancer screening obtained from 484 average risk patients using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in a prior study into rank order-based priorities using rank order centroids. We compared the two sets of priorities using Spearman rank correlation and non-parametric Bland-Altman limits of agreement analysis. We assessed the differential impact of using the rank order-based versus the AHP-based priorities on the results of a full MCDA comparing three currently recommended colorectal cancer screening strategies. Generalizability of the results was assessed using Monte Carlo simulation. Results Correlations between the two sets of priorities for the seven criteria ranged from 0.55 to 0.92. The proportions of absolute differences between rank order-based and AHP-based priorities that were more than ± 0.15 ranged from 1% to 16%. Differences in the full MCDA results were minimal and the relative rankings of the three screening options were identical more than 88% of the time. The Monte Carlo simulation results were similar. Conclusion Rank order-based MCDA could be a simple, practical way to guide individual decisions and assess population decision priorities regarding colorectal cancer screening strategies. Additional research is warranted to further explore the use of these methods for promoting shared decision making. PMID:24300851

40 CFR 35.915 - State priority system and project priorty list.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... State priority system and list must be designed to achieve optimum water quality management consistent... water quality management (WQM) plans. The State shall hold a public hearing before submission of the... also sets forth the administrative, management, and public participation procedures required to develop...

Enrollees Choose Priorities for Medicare

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Danis, Marion; Biddle, Andrea K.; Goold, Susan Dorr

2004-01-01

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility and results of ascertaining Medicare enrollees' priorities for insured medical benefits. Design and Methods: Structured group exercises were conducted with Medicare enrollees from clinical and community settings in central North Carolina. By participating in a decision exercise,…

10 CFR 221.1 - Scope.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... PRIORITY SUPPLY OF CRUDE OIL AND PETROLEUM PRODUCTS TO THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE UNDER THE DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT General § 221.1 Scope. This part sets forth the procedures to be utilized by the Economic Regulatory Administration of the Department of Energy and the Department of Defense whenever the priority...

32 CFR 260.4 - Policy.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... DoD Component having accountability for real property shall extend priority on such property to the blind when implementing the Randolph-Sheppard Act, as set out in the following paragraphs: (a) The blind shall be given priority in the establishment and operation of vending facilities. (b) The blind shall be...

The No-Destination Ship of Priority-Setting in Healthcare: A Call for More Democracy

PubMed Central

Seixas, Brayan V.

2018-01-01

In dealing with scarcity of resources within healthcare systems, decision-makers inevitably have to make choices about which services to fund. Setting priorities represents a challenging task that requires systematic, explicit and transparent methodologies with focus on economic efficiency. In addition, the engagement of the general public in the process of decision-making has been regarded as one of the most important aspects of the management of publicly-funded health systems in liberal democracies. In the current essay, we aim to discuss the problematics of public engagement in the process of resource allocation and priority-setting within the context of publiclyfunded health systems. Our central argument is that although there may be a conflict between democratic mechanisms of citizen participation and economic efficiency, in the extra-welfarist sense, expected for/from the system, the solution for this tension does not seem to rely on more or novel authoritative technocratic approaches, but rather on the deepening and betterment of democratic participation. PMID:29626402

Scientific Investigation of the Jovian System: the Jupiter System Observer Mission Concept

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Spilker, Thomas R.; Senske, D. A.; Prockter, L.; Kwok, J. H.; Tan-Wang, G. H.; SDT, JSO

2007-10-01

NASA's Science Mission Directorate (SMD), in efforts to start an outer solar system flagship mission in the near future, commissioned studies of mission concepts for four high-priority outer solar system destinations: Europa, the Jovian system, Titan, and Enceladus. Our team has identified and evaluated science and mission architectures to investigate major elements of the Jovian system: Jupiter, the Galilean moons, rings, and magnetosphere, and their interactions. SMD dubbed the mission concept the "Jupiter System Observer (JSO)." At abstract submission this JPL-led study is nearly complete, with final report submission in August 2007. SMD intends to select a subset of these four concepts for additional detailed study, leading to a potential flagship mission new start. A rich set of science objectives that JSO can address quite well have been identified. The highly capable science payload (including 50-cm optic), an extensive tour with multiple close flybys of Io, Europa, Ganymede and Callisto, and a significant time in orbit at Ganymede, addresses a large set of Solar System Exploration Decadal Survey (2003) and NASA Solar System Exploration Roadmap (2006) high-priority objectives. With the engineering team, the Science Definition Team evaluated a suite of mission architectures and the science they enable to arrive at two architectures that provide the best science for their estimated mission costs. This paper discusses the science objectives and operational capabilities and considerations for these mission concepts. This work was performed at JPL, APL, and other institutions under contract to NASA.

Research priorities for adolescent health in low- and middle-income countries: A mixed-methods synthesis of two separate exercises

PubMed Central

Nagata, Jason M; Hathi, Sejal; Ferguson, B Jane; Hindin, Michele J; Yoshida, Sachiyo; Ross, David A

2018-01-01

Background In order to clarify priorities and stimulate research in adolescent health in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted two priority-setting exercises based on the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology related to 1) adolescent sexual and reproductive health and 2) eight areas of adolescent health including communicable diseases prevention and management, injuries and violence, mental health, non-communicable diseases management, nutrition, physical activity, substance use, and health policy. Although the CHNRI methodology has been utilized in over 50 separate research priority setting exercises, none have qualitatively synthesized the ultimate findings across studies. The purpose of this study was to conduct a mixed-method synthesis of two research priority-setting exercises for adolescent health in LMICs based on the CHNRI methodology and to situate the priority questions within the current global health agenda. Methods All of the 116 top-ranked questions presented in each exercise were analyzed by two independent reviewers. Word clouds were generated based on keywords from the top-ranked questions. Questions were coded and content analysis was conducted based on type of delivery platform, vulnerable populations, and the Survive, Thrive, and Transform framework from the United Nations Global Strategy for Women’s, Children’s, and Adolescents’ Health, 2016-2030. Findings Within the 53 top-ranked intervention-related questions that specified a delivery platform, the platforms specified were schools (n = 17), primary care (n = 12), community (n = 11), parenting (n = 6), virtual media (n = 5), and peers (n = 2). Twenty questions specifically focused on vulnerable adolescents, including those living with HIV, tuberculosis, mental illness, or neurodevelopmental disorders; victims of gender-based violence; refugees; young persons who inject drugs; sex workers; slum dwellers; out-of-school youth; and youth in armed conflict. A majority of the top-ranked questions (108/116) aligned with one or a combination of the Survive (n = 39), Thrive (n = 67), and Transform (n = 28) agendas. Conclusions This study advances the CHNRI methodology by conducting the first mixed-methods synthesis of multiple research priority-setting exercises by analyzing keywords (using word clouds) and themes (using content analysis). PMID:29497507

Setting priorities in health research using the model proposed by the World Health Organization: development of a quantitative methodology using tuberculosis in South Africa as a worked example.

PubMed

Hacking, Damian; Cleary, Susan

2016-02-09

Setting priorities is important in health research given the limited resources available for research. Various guidelines exist to assist in the priority setting process; however, priority setting still faces significant challenges such as the clear ranking of identified priorities. The World Health Organization (WHO) proposed a Disability Adjusted Life Year (DALY)-based model to rank priorities by research area (basic, health systems and biomedical) by dividing the DALYs into 'unavertable with existing interventions', 'avertable with improved efficiency' and 'avertable with existing but non-cost-effective interventions', respectively. However, the model has conceptual flaws and no clear methodology for its construction. Therefore, the aim of this paper was to amend the model to address these flaws, and develop a clear methodology by using tuberculosis in South Africa as a worked example. An amended model was constructed to represent total DALYs as the product of DALYs per person and absolute burden of disease. These figures were calculated for all countries from WHO datasets. The lowest figures achieved by any country were assumed to represent 'unavertable with existing interventions' if extrapolated to South Africa. The ratio of 'cost per patient treated' (adjusted for purchasing power and outcome weighted) between South Africa and the best country was used to calculate the 'avertable with improved efficiency section'. Finally, 'avertable with existing but non-cost-effective interventions' was calculated using Disease Control Priorities Project efficacy data, and the ratio between the best intervention and South Africa's current intervention, irrespective of cost. The amended model shows that South Africa has a tuberculosis burden of 1,009,837.3 DALYs; 0.009% of DALYs are unavertable with existing interventions and 96.3% of DALYs could be averted with improvements in efficiency. Of the remaining DALYs, a further 56.9% could be averted with existing but non-cost-effective interventions. The amended model was successfully constructed using limited data sources. The generalizability of the data used is the main limitation of the model. More complex formulas are required to deal with such potential confounding variables; however, the results act as starting point for development of a more robust model.

Ethical Challenges in the Provision of Dialysis in Resource-Constrained Environments.

PubMed

Luyckx, Valerie A; Miljeteig, Ingrid; Ejigu, Addisu M; Moosa, M Rafique

2017-05-01

The number of patients requiring dialysis by 2030 is projected to double worldwide, with the largest increase expected in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Dialysis is seldom considered a high priority by health care funders, consequently, few LMICs develop policies regarding dialysis allocation. Dialysis facilities may exist, but access remains highly inequitable in LMICs. High out-of-pocket payments make dialysis unsustainable and plunge many families into poverty. Patients, families, and clinicians suffer significant emotional and moral distress from daily life-and-death decisions imposed by dialysis. The health system's obligation to provide financial risk protection is an important component of global and national strategies to achieve universal health coverage. An ethical imperative therefore exists to develop transparent dialysis priority-setting guidelines to facilitate public understanding and acceptance of the realistic limits within the health system, and facilitate fair allocation of scarce resources. In this article, we present ethical challenges faced by patients, families, clinicians, and policy makers where dialysis is not universally accessible and discuss the potential ethical consequences of various dialysis allocation strategies. Finally, we suggest an ethical framework for use in policy development for priority setting of dialysis care. The accountability for reasonableness framework is proposed as a procedurally fair decision-making, priority-setting process. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

[Ten years' German Protection against Infection Act. Evaluation of the implementation of infection control visits in the ambulatory medical setting].

PubMed

Heudorf, U; Eikmann, T; Exner, M

2013-03-01

In 2001, the German Protection against Infection Act came into force, implementing a variety of new regulations. For the first time, obligatory infection control visits of the public health departments in surgical ambulatory practices were implemented, as well as optional infection control visits in all medical, dental and paramedical practices using invasive methods. Based on the data of the public health department of the city of Frankfurt am Main, Germany, an evaluation of this new regulation is given in this paper. First, prioritization of these new tasks was mandatory. First priority was given to the obligatory visits in surgical practices, second priority to the hygiene visits in practices performing endoscopy in gastroenterology as well as in urology and in practices of traditional healers, and third priority was given to all other doctors' practices. After receiving preliminary information and further training of the doctors etc., the control visits were performed by members of the public health department, using a checklist based on the guidelines of the German Commission on Hospital Infection Prevention ("Kommission für Krankenhaushygiene und Infektionsprävention"). Since 2001, more than 1100 infection control visits in medical practices in Frankfurt am Main were documented. Not only in surgical, but also in gastroenterological and urological practices great improvement could be achieved, regarding not only hand hygiene and reprocessing surface areas, but especially in reprocessing medical devices. In practices for internal medicine and those of general practitioners, errors in hand hygiene, skin antiseptic and surface disinfection also decreased. According to our results, especially regarding the improved quality of structure as well as quality of process and with regard to the public discussion on this hygiene topic, our evaluation is absolutely positive. The new regulation proved worthwhile.

Understanding what matters: An exploratory study to investigate the views of the general public for priority setting criteria in health care.

PubMed

Ratcliffe, Julie; Lancsar, Emily; Walker, Ruth; Gu, Yuanyuan

2017-06-01

Health care policy makers internationally are increasingly expressing commitment to consultation with, and incorporation of, the views of the general public into the formulation of health policy and the process of setting health care priorities. In practice, however, there are relatively few opportunities for the general public to be involved in health care decision-making. In making resource allocation decisions, funders, tasked with managing scarce health care resources, are often faced with difficult decisions in balancing efficiency with equity considerations. A mixed methods (qualitative and quantitative) approach incorporating focus group discussions and a ranking exercise was utilised to develop a comprehensive list of potential criteria for setting priorities in health care formulated from the perspective of members of the general public in Australia. A strong level of congruence was found in terms of the rankings of the key criteria with the size of the health gain, clinical effectiveness, and the ability to provide quality of life improvements identified consistently as the three most important criteria for prioritising the funding of an intervention. Findings from this study will be incorporated into a novel DCE framework to explore how decision makers and members of the general public prioritize and trade off different types of health gain and to quantify the weights attached to specific efficiency and equity criteria in the priority setting process. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Public involvement in health priority setting: future challenges for policy, research and society.

PubMed

Hunter, David James; Kieslich, Katharina; Littlejohns, Peter; Staniszewska, Sophie; Tumilty, Emma; Weale, Albert; Williams, Iestyn

2016-08-15

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to reflect on the findings of this special issue and discusses the future challenges for policy, research and society. The findings suggest that challenges emerge as a result of legitimacy deficits of both consensus and contestatory modes of public involvement in health priority setting. Design/methodology/approach - The paper draws on the discussions and findings presented in this special issue. It seeks to bring the country experiences and case studies together to draw conclusions for policy, research and society. Findings - At least two recurring themes emerge. An underlying theme is the importance, but also the challenge, of establishing legitimacy in health priority setting. The country experiences suggest that we understand very little about the conditions under which representative, or authentic, participation generates legitimacy and under which it will be regarded as insufficient. A second observation is that public participation takes a variety of forms that depend on the opportunity structures in a given national context. Given this variety the conceptualization of public participation needs to be expanded to account for the many forms of public participation. Originality/value - The paper concludes that the challenges of public involvement are closely linked to the question of how legitimate processes and decisions can be generated in priority setting. This suggests that future research must focus more narrowly on conditions under which legitimacy are generated in order to expand the understanding of public involvement in health prioritization.

Developing a Common Framework for Evaluating the Implementation of Genomic Medicine Interventions in Clinical Care: The IGNITE Network’s Common Measures Working Group

PubMed Central

Orlando, Lori A.; Sperber, Nina R.; Voils, Corrine; Nichols, Marshall; Myers, Rachel A.; Wu, R. Ryanne; Rakhra-Burris, Tejinder; Levy, Kenneth D.; Levy, Mia; Pollin, Toni I.; Guan, Yue; Horowitz, Carol R.; Ramos, Michelle; Kimmel, Stephen E.; McDonough, Caitrin W.; Madden, Ebony B.; Damschroder, Laura J.

2017-01-01

Purpose Implementation research provides a structure for evaluating the clinical integration of genomic medicine interventions. This paper describes the Implementing GeNomics In PracTicE (IGNITE) Network’s efforts to promote: 1) a broader understanding of genomic medicine implementation research; and 2) the sharing of knowledge generated in the network. Methods To facilitate this goal the IGNITE Network Common Measures Working Group (CMG) members adopted the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to guide their approach to: identifying constructs and measures relevant to evaluating genomic medicine as a whole, standardizing data collection across projects, and combining data in a centralized resource for cross network analyses. Results CMG identified ten high-priority CFIR constructs as important for genomic medicine. Of those, eight didn’t have standardized measurement instruments. Therefore, we developed four survey tools to address this gap. In addition, we identified seven high-priority constructs related to patients, families, and communities that did not map to CFIR constructs. Both sets of constructs were combined to create a draft genomic medicine implementation model. Conclusion We developed processes to identify constructs deemed valuable for genomic medicine implementation and codified them in a model. These resources are freely available to facilitate knowledge generation and sharing across the field. PMID:28914267

Developing a common framework for evaluating the implementation of genomic medicine interventions in clinical care: the IGNITE Network's Common Measures Working Group.

PubMed

Orlando, Lori A; Sperber, Nina R; Voils, Corrine; Nichols, Marshall; Myers, Rachel A; Wu, R Ryanne; Rakhra-Burris, Tejinder; Levy, Kenneth D; Levy, Mia; Pollin, Toni I; Guan, Yue; Horowitz, Carol R; Ramos, Michelle; Kimmel, Stephen E; McDonough, Caitrin W; Madden, Ebony B; Damschroder, Laura J

2018-06-01

PurposeImplementation research provides a structure for evaluating the clinical integration of genomic medicine interventions. This paper describes the Implementing Genomics in Practice (IGNITE) Network's efforts to promote (i) a broader understanding of genomic medicine implementation research and (ii) the sharing of knowledge generated in the network.MethodsTo facilitate this goal, the IGNITE Network Common Measures Working Group (CMG) members adopted the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to guide its approach to identifying constructs and measures relevant to evaluating genomic medicine as a whole, standardizing data collection across projects, and combining data in a centralized resource for cross-network analyses.ResultsCMG identified 10 high-priority CFIR constructs as important for genomic medicine. Of those, eight did not have standardized measurement instruments. Therefore, we developed four survey tools to address this gap. In addition, we identified seven high-priority constructs related to patients, families, and communities that did not map to CFIR constructs. Both sets of constructs were combined to create a draft genomic medicine implementation model.ConclusionWe developed processes to identify constructs deemed valuable for genomic medicine implementation and codified them in a model. These resources are freely available to facilitate knowledge generation and sharing across the field.

Sustaining Changes that Support Student Success in Community College

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Burdman, Pamela

2009-01-01

Because of the increasingly prominent role of foundations in supporting improved opportunities for community college students, it may be helpful to understand how foundations set priorities and make decisions. Some foundations engage in responsive grant making, whereby they outline priority areas and then respond to proposals received from the…

National VET Research Priorities: 2010 and beyond. Discussion Paper

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER), 2009

2009-01-01

National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER) is undertaking a consultation process to determine the next set of National Research Priorities which will guide research activities in the post-compulsory education and training arena, particularly in relation to vocational education and training. This discussion paper, and the…

Making a List and Checking It Twice?

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Jarrell, Andrea

1999-01-01

Discusses the components of strategic planning in developing a fund-raising campaign for a college or university. Emphasizes the importance of setting priorities, and defines the characteristics of good priorities, such as boldness, being grounded in the institution's mission, and culminating in visible results. Includes a case study of the…

29 CFR 4044.10 - Manner of allocation.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... benefits under the plan using the rules and procedures set forth in paragraphs (b) through (f) of this... terminated plan shall be assigned to one or more priority categories in accordance with §§ 4044.11 through 4044.16. Benefits derived from voluntary employee contributions, which are assigned only to priority...

13 CFR 313.8 - Competitive process.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... implementation grant shall be reviewed by EDA in accord with a competitive process as set forth in the applicable FFO, to ensure that EDA awards funds to the most merit-worthy projects. (b) Priority for grants to small- and medium-sized Communities. EDA shall give priority to an application submitted under this part...

76 FR 32133 - FAR Council's Plan for Retrospective Review Under Executive Order 13563-Preliminary Plan

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-06-03

... (E.O.) 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review.'' The E.O. sets forth principles and... resources and regulatory priorities, under which the agency will periodically review its existing... retrospective analysis. The Council's plan has tentatively identified eight priority initiatives for new or...

5 CFR 302.105 - Special agency plans.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... preference or priority consideration referred to in sections 1302(c) or 8151 of title 5, United States Code, but which does not conform to all the procedural requirements set forth in this part. The agency establishing such a system must ensure that all eligible applicants entitled to veteran preference or priority...

Social welfare and the Affordable Care Act: is it ever optimal to set aside comparative cost?

PubMed

Mortimer, Duncan; Peacock, Stuart

2012-10-01

The creation of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) under the Affordable Care Act has set comparative effectiveness research (CER) at centre stage of US health care reform. Comparative cost analysis has remained marginalised and it now appears unlikely that the PCORI will require comparative cost data to be collected as an essential component of CER. In this paper, we review the literature to identify ethical and distributional objectives that might motivate calls to set priorities without regard to comparative cost. We then present argument and evidence to consider whether there is any plausible set of objectives and constraints against which priorities can be set without reference to comparative cost. We conclude that - to set aside comparative cost even after accounting for ethical and distributional constraints - would be truly to act as if money is no object. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Assessing Feasibility of Priority Operations on Highways

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

1973-05-01

This study was carried out as part of the BALANCE bus-priority-system evaluation. The objective of this study was to estimate the improvement in freeway passenger flow resulting from the reservation of priority lanes for buses and carpools. These est...

Setting health priorities in a community: a case example

PubMed Central

Sousa, Fábio Alexandre Melo do Rego; Goulart, Maria José Garcia; Braga, Antonieta Manuela dos Santos; Medeiros, Clara Maria Oliveira; Rego, Débora Cristina Martins; Vieira, Flávio Garcia; Pereira, Helder José Alves da Rocha; Tavares, Helena Margarida Correia Vicente; Loura, Marta Maria Puim

2017-01-01

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To describe the methodology used in the process of setting health priorities for community intervention in a community of older adults. METHODS Based on the results of a health diagnosis related to active aging, a prioritization process was conceived to select the priority intervention problem. The process comprised four successive phases of problem analysis and classification: (1) grouping by level of similarity, (2) classification according to epidemiological criteria, (3) ordering by experts, and (4) application of the Hanlon method. These stages combined, in an integrated manner, the views of health team professionals, community nursing and gerontology experts, and the actual community. RESULTS The first stage grouped the identified problems by level of similarity, comprising a body of 19 issues for analysis. In the second stage these problems were classified by the health team members by epidemiological criteria (size, vulnerability, and transcendence). The nine most relevant problems resulting from the second stage of the process were submitted to expert analysis and the five most pertinent problems were selected. The last step identified the priority issue for intervention in this specific community with the participation of formal and informal community leaders: Low Social Interaction in Community Participation. CONCLUSIONS The prioritization process is a key step in health planning, enabling the identification of priority problems to intervene in a given community at a given time. There are no default formulas for selecting priority issues. It is up to each community intervention team to define its own process with different methods/techniques that allow the identification of and intervention in needs classified as priority by the community. PMID:28273229

Discrimination and Health among Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Trans People in Puerto Rico.

PubMed

Rodríguez-Díaz, Carlos E; Jovet-Toledo, Gerardo G; Vélez-Vega, Carmen M; Ortiz-Sánchez, Edgardo J; Santiago-Rodríguez, Edda I; Vargas-Molina, Ricardo L; Rodríguez Madera, Sheilla L; Mulinelli-Rodríguez, José J

2016-09-01

To identify the experiences of discrimination among and the perceived priorities for the health of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans (LGBT) people in Puerto Rico (PR). Data were collected during the 2013 LGBT Pride Parade in San Juan, using a brief self-administered survey that included questions on sociodemographic characteristics, the disclosure of sexual orientation/gender identity, experiences of discrimination, experiences while receiving social and health services, and perceived healthcare priorities and needs. Most participants reported that they had disclosed their sexual orientation to at least one person. Discrimination due to sexual orientation/gender identity was most frequently reported to have occurred in school settings. At least 25% of the sample reported regular or negative experiences based on sexual orientation/gender identity when receiving government services and when looking for support from relatives. HIV/AIDS, mental health, and sexual health were identified as healthcare priorities. In bivariate analyses, mental health services and aging were the priorities most frequently reported among older participants. HIV/AIDS was the main priority only for gay men; sexual health was the main priority for bisexuals; and mental health was the main priority for lesbians. Most participants reported that their preferred modalities for health service provision were support groups and health education. The experiences of discrimination among LGBT people in PR were consistent across age groups and sexual orientation/gender identity. Policies and interventions to address discrimination in different settings are necessary. The findings also suggest the need to prioritize HIV services among gay men and to address mental and sexual health needs among lesbian and bisexual people.

An approach for setting evidence-based and stakeholder-informed research priorities in low- and middle-income countries.

PubMed

Rehfuess, Eva A; Durão, Solange; Kyamanywa, Patrick; Meerpohl, Joerg J; Young, Taryn; Rohwer, Anke

2016-04-01

To derive evidence-based and stakeholder-informed research priorities for implementation in African settings, the international research consortium Collaboration for Evidence-Based Healthcare and Public Health in Africa (CEBHA+) developed and applied a pragmatic approach. First, an online survey and face-to-face consultation between CEBHA+ partners and policy-makers generated priority research areas. Second, evidence maps for these priority research areas identified gaps and related priority research questions. Finally, study protocols were developed for inclusion within a grant proposal. Policy and practice representatives were involved throughout the process. Tuberculosis, diabetes, hypertension and road traffic injuries were selected as priority research areas. Evidence maps covered screening and models of care for diabetes and hypertension, population-level prevention of diabetes and hypertension and their risk factors, and prevention and management of road traffic injuries. Analysis of these maps yielded three priority research questions on hypertension and diabetes and one on road traffic injuries. The four resulting study protocols employ a broad range of primary and secondary research methods; a fifth promotes an integrated methodological approach across all research activities. The CEBHA+ approach, in particular evidence mapping, helped to formulate research questions and study protocols that would be owned by African partners, fill gaps in the evidence base, address policy and practice needs and be feasible given the existing research infrastructure and expertise. The consortium believes that the continuous involvement of decision-makers throughout the research process is an important means of ensuring that studies are relevant to the African context and that findings are rapidly implemented.

44 CFR 152.5 - Review process and evaluation criteria.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... criteria and the program priorities. Eligible applicants that best address the priorities will advance to a... Review process and evaluation criteria. (a) Every application will be evaluated based on the answers to... screening will be in the “competitive range” and subject to a second level of review. We will use the...

Identifying and prioritising systematic review topics with public health stakeholders: A protocol for a modified Delphi study in Switzerland to inform future research agendas.

PubMed

Hoekstra, Dyon; Mütsch, Margot; Kien, Christina; Gerhardus, Ansgar; Lhachimi, Stefan K

2017-08-04

The Cochrane Collaboration aims to produce relevant and top priority evidence that responds to existing evidence gaps. Hence, research priority setting (RPS) is important to identify which potential research gaps are deemed most important. Moreover, RPS supports future health research to conform both health and health evidence needs. However, studies that are prioritising systematic review topics in public health are surprisingly rare. Therefore, to inform the research agenda of Cochrane Public Health Europe (CPHE), we introduce the protocol of a priority setting study on systematic review topics in several European countries, which is conceptualised as pilot. We will conduct a two-round modified Delphi study in Switzerland, incorporating an anonymous web-based questionnaire, to assess which topics should be prioritised for systematic reviews in public health. In the first Delphi round public health stakeholders will suggest relevant assessment criteria and potential priority topics. In the second Delphi round the participants indicate their (dis)agreement to the aggregated results of the first round and rate the potential review topics with the predetermined criteria on a four-point Likert scale. As we invite a wide variety of stakeholders we will compare the results between the different stakeholder groups. We have received ethical approval from the ethical board of the University of Bremen, Germany (principal investigation is conducted at the University of Bremen) and a certificate of non-objection from the Canton of Zurich, Switzerland (fieldwork will be conducted in Switzerland). The results of this study will be further disseminated through peer reviewed publication and will support systematic review author groups (i.a. CPHE) to improve the relevance of the groups´ future review work. Finally, the proposed priority setting study can be used as a framework by other systematic review groups when conducting a priority setting study in a different context. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

An international eDelphi study identifying the research and education priorities in wound management and tissue repair.

PubMed

Cowman, Seamus; Gethin, Georgina; Clarke, Eric; Moore, Zena; Craig, Gerardine; Jordan-O'Brien, Julie; McLain, Niamh; Strapp, Helen

2012-02-01

To incorporate an international and multidisciplinary consensus in the determination of the research and education priorities for wound healing and tissue repair. A compelling reason for the study is the lack of an agreed list of priorities for wound care research and education. Furthermore, there is a growth in the prevalence of chronic wounds, a growth in wound care products and marketing, and an increase in clinician attendance at conferences and education programmes. The study used a survey method. A four-round eDelphi technique was used to collect responses from an international population of health professionals across 24 countries. Responses were obtained from 360 professionals representing many health care settings. The top education priorities related to the standardisation of all foundation education programmes in wound care, the inclusion of wound care in all professional undergraduate and postgraduate education programmes, selecting dressings and the prevention of pressure ulcers. The top research priorities related to the dressing selection, pressure ulcer prevention and wound infection. conclusion: Professionals from different backgrounds and countries who are engaged in wound management share a common set of priorities for research and education. Most notably, the priorities identified relate to long-established clinical challenges in wound care and underpin the principles of good patient care practices. The priorities are closely allied to an ageing population and identify many challenges ahead for practitioners engaged in wound management services. The provision of wound care is a major investment of health service resources and remains a clinical challenge today. Research is essential to building evidence-based practice and fundamental to development of quality in standards of practice; education is central to achieving competence to deliver effective care. The determination of research and education priorities is therefore an absolute requirement in developing services. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Evaluation of service reliability impacts of traffic signal priority strategies for bus transit

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

2003-03-31

Recent progress in technology has facilitated the design, testing, and deployment of traffic signal priority strategies for transit buses. However, a clear consensus has not emerged regarding the evaluation of these strategies. Each agency implementi...

Transit signal priority systems application and technology investigation : final report, March 2009.

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

2009-03-01

This report describes the process and results of research to develop an evaluation process that will : assist NJ Transit in quickly determining which intersections are good candidates for Transit Signal : Priority (TSP). This evaluation process is ap...

Priority service needs and receipt across the lifespan for individuals with autism spectrum disorder

PubMed Central

Lai, Jonathan K. Y.

2017-01-01

Abstract Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) have a range of health, community, and social support needs across the lifespan that create age‐specific challenges in navigating service sectors. In this study, we set out to identify the priority needs of individuals with ASD across the lifespan, and the factors that predict receiving priority services. Participants included 3,317 individuals with ASD from a Canada‐wide online caregiver survey, stratified into five age groups (preschool, elementary school age, adolescence, emerging adulthood, adulthood). Priority receipt was calculated as a ratio of current services that corresponded to individualized priority need. Age‐stratified Poisson regression analyses were used to identify the sociodemographic, clinical and systemic predictors of priority receipt. Results indicate that the distribution of priority need varied by age, except for social skills programming, which was a high across all groups. The number of high and moderate priority needs diversified with age. Overall, 30% of individuals had none of their priority needs met and priority receipt decreased with age. Systemic factors were most consistently related to priority receipt across the lifespan. Understanding patterns and correlates of priority needs and use that currently exist in different age groups can inform policies to improve service access. Autism Res 2017, 10: 1436–1447. © 2017 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. PMID:28383156

Improving effectiveness of systematic conservation planning with density data.

PubMed

Veloz, Samuel; Salas, Leonardo; Altman, Bob; Alexander, John; Jongsomjit, Dennis; Elliott, Nathan; Ballard, Grant

2015-08-01

Systematic conservation planning aims to design networks of protected areas that meet conservation goals across large landscapes. The optimal design of these conservation networks is most frequently based on the modeled habitat suitability or probability of occurrence of species, despite evidence that model predictions may not be highly correlated with species density. We hypothesized that conservation networks designed using species density distributions more efficiently conserve populations of all species considered than networks designed using probability of occurrence models. To test this hypothesis, we used the Zonation conservation prioritization algorithm to evaluate conservation network designs based on probability of occurrence versus density models for 26 land bird species in the U.S. Pacific Northwest. We assessed the efficacy of each conservation network based on predicted species densities and predicted species diversity. High-density model Zonation rankings protected more individuals per species when networks protected the highest priority 10-40% of the landscape. Compared with density-based models, the occurrence-based models protected more individuals in the lowest 50% priority areas of the landscape. The 2 approaches conserved species diversity in similar ways: predicted diversity was higher in higher priority locations in both conservation networks. We conclude that both density and probability of occurrence models can be useful for setting conservation priorities but that density-based models are best suited for identifying the highest priority areas. Developing methods to aggregate species count data from unrelated monitoring efforts and making these data widely available through ecoinformatics portals such as the Avian Knowledge Network will enable species count data to be more widely incorporated into systematic conservation planning efforts. © 2015, Society for Conservation Biology.

Ecosystem Services Modeling as a Tool for Defining Priority Areas for Conservation.

PubMed

Duarte, Gabriela Teixeira; Ribeiro, Milton Cezar; Paglia, Adriano Pereira

2016-01-01

Conservationists often have difficulty obtaining financial and social support for protected areas that do not demonstrate their benefits for society. Therefore, ecosystem services have gained importance in conservation science in the last decade, as these services provide further justification for appropriate management and conservation of natural systems. We used InVEST software and a set of GIS procedures to quantify, spatialize and evaluated the overlap between ecosystem services-carbon stock and sediment retention-and a biodiversity proxy-habitat quality. In addition, we proposed a method that serves as an initial approach of a priority areas selection process. The method considers the synergism between ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation. Our study region is the Iron Quadrangle, an important Brazilian mining province and a conservation priority area located in the interface of two biodiversity hotspots, the Cerrado and Atlantic Forest biomes. The resultant priority area for the maintenance of the highest values of ecosystem services and habitat quality was about 13% of the study area. Among those priority areas, 30% are already within established strictly protected areas, and 12% are in sustainable use protected areas. Following the transparent and highly replicable method we proposed in this study, conservation planners can better determine which areas fulfill multiple goals and can locate the trade-offs in the landscape. We also gave a step towards the improvement of the habitat quality model with a topography parameter. In areas of very rugged topography, we have to consider geomorfometric barriers for anthropogenic impacts and for species movement and we must think beyond the linear distances. Moreover, we used a model that considers the tree mortality caused by edge effects in the estimation of carbon stock. We found low spatial congruence among the modeled services, mostly because of the pattern of sediment retention distribution.

Ecosystem Services Modeling as a Tool for Defining Priority Areas for Conservation

PubMed Central

Duarte, Gabriela Teixeira; Ribeiro, Milton Cezar; Paglia, Adriano Pereira

2016-01-01

Conservationists often have difficulty obtaining financial and social support for protected areas that do not demonstrate their benefits for society. Therefore, ecosystem services have gained importance in conservation science in the last decade, as these services provide further justification for appropriate management and conservation of natural systems. We used InVEST software and a set of GIS procedures to quantify, spatialize and evaluated the overlap between ecosystem services—carbon stock and sediment retention—and a biodiversity proxy–habitat quality. In addition, we proposed a method that serves as an initial approach of a priority areas selection process. The method considers the synergism between ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation. Our study region is the Iron Quadrangle, an important Brazilian mining province and a conservation priority area located in the interface of two biodiversity hotspots, the Cerrado and Atlantic Forest biomes. The resultant priority area for the maintenance of the highest values of ecosystem services and habitat quality was about 13% of the study area. Among those priority areas, 30% are already within established strictly protected areas, and 12% are in sustainable use protected areas. Following the transparent and highly replicable method we proposed in this study, conservation planners can better determine which areas fulfill multiple goals and can locate the trade-offs in the landscape. We also gave a step towards the improvement of the habitat quality model with a topography parameter. In areas of very rugged topography, we have to consider geomorfometric barriers for anthropogenic impacts and for species movement and we must think beyond the linear distances. Moreover, we used a model that considers the tree mortality caused by edge effects in the estimation of carbon stock. We found low spatial congruence among the modeled services, mostly because of the pattern of sediment retention distribution. PMID:27145031

Scale-dependent complementarity of climatic velocity and environmental diversity for identifying priority areas for conservation under climate change.

PubMed

Carroll, Carlos; Roberts, David R; Michalak, Julia L; Lawler, Joshua J; Nielsen, Scott E; Stralberg, Diana; Hamann, Andreas; Mcrae, Brad H; Wang, Tongli

2017-11-01

As most regions of the earth transition to altered climatic conditions, new methods are needed to identify refugia and other areas whose conservation would facilitate persistence of biodiversity under climate change. We compared several common approaches to conservation planning focused on climate resilience over a broad range of ecological settings across North America and evaluated how commonalities in the priority areas identified by different methods varied with regional context and spatial scale. Our results indicate that priority areas based on different environmental diversity metrics differed substantially from each other and from priorities based on spatiotemporal metrics such as climatic velocity. Refugia identified by diversity or velocity metrics were not strongly associated with the current protected area system, suggesting the need for additional conservation measures including protection of refugia. Despite the inherent uncertainties in predicting future climate, we found that variation among climatic velocities derived from different general circulation models and emissions pathways was less than the variation among the suite of environmental diversity metrics. To address uncertainty created by this variation, planners can combine priorities identified by alternative metrics at a single resolution and downweight areas of high variation between metrics. Alternately, coarse-resolution velocity metrics can be combined with fine-resolution diversity metrics in order to leverage the respective strengths of the two groups of metrics as tools for identification of potential macro- and microrefugia that in combination maximize both transient and long-term resilience to climate change. Planners should compare and integrate approaches that span a range of model complexity and spatial scale to match the range of ecological and physical processes influencing persistence of biodiversity and identify a conservation network resilient to threats operating at multiple scales. © 2017 The Authors. Global Change Biology Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Avian Conservation Areas as a Proxy for Contaminated Soil Remediation

PubMed Central

Lin, Wei-Chih; Lin, Yu-Pin; Anthony, Johnathen; Ding, Tsun-Su

2015-01-01

Remediation prioritization frequently falls short of systematically evaluating the underlying ecological value of different sites. This study presents a novel approach to delineating sites that are both contaminated by any of eight heavy metals and have high habitat value to high-priority species. The conservation priority of each planning site herein was based on the projected distributions of eight protected bird species, simulated using 900 outputs of species distribution models (SDMs) and the subsequent application of a systematic conservation tool. The distributions of heavy metal concentrations were generated using a geostatistical joint-simulation approach. The uncertainties in the heavy metal distributions were quantified in terms of variability among 1000 realization sets. Finally, a novel remediation decision-making approach was presented for delineating contaminated sites in need of remediation based on the spatial uncertainties of multiple realizations and the priorities of conservation areas. The results thus obtained demonstrate that up to 42% of areas of high conservation priority are also contaminated by one or more of the heavy metal contaminants of interest. Moreover, as the proportion of the land for proposed remediated increased, the projected area of the pollution-free habitat also increased. Overall uncertainty, in terms of the false positive contamination rate, also increased. These results indicate that the proposed decision-making approach successfully accounted for the intrinsic trade-offs among a high number of pollution-free habitats, low false positive rates and robustness of expected decision outcomes. PMID:26193297

Comparative evaluation of the potential impact of rotavirus versus HPV vaccination in GAVI-eligible countries: a preliminary analysis focused on the relative disease burden.

PubMed

Kim, Sun-Young; Sweet, Steven; Chang, Joshua; Goldie, Sue J

2011-06-16

Immunization policymakers at global and local levels need to establish priorities among new vaccines competing for limited resources. However, comparison of the potential impact of single vaccination programs is challenging, primarily due to the limited number of vaccine analyses as well as their differing analytic approaches and reporting formats. The purpose of this study is to provide early insight into how the comparative impact of different new vaccines could be assessed in resource-poor settings with respect to affordability, cost-effectiveness, and distributional equity. We compared the health, economic, and financial consequences of introducing the two vaccines in 72 GAVI-eligible countries using a number of different outcome measures to evaluate affordability, cost-effectiveness, and distributional equity. We use simple static models to standardize the analytic framework and improve comparability between the two new vaccines. These simple models were validated by leveraging previously developed, more complex models for rotavirus and human papillomavirus (HPV). With 70% coverage of a single-age cohort of infants and pre-adolescent girls, the lives saved with rotavirus (~274,000) and HPV vaccines (~286,000) are similar, although the timing of averted mortality differs; rotavirus-attributable deaths occur in close proximity to infection, while HPV-related cancer deaths occur largely after age 30. Deaths averted per 1000 vaccinated are 5.2 (rotavirus) and 12.6 (HPV). Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted were ~7.15 million (rotavirus) and ~1.30 million (HPV), reflecting the greater influence of discounting on the latter, given the lagtime between vaccination and averted cancer. In most countries (68 for rotavirus and 66 for HPV, at the cost of I$25 per vaccinated individual) the incremental cost per DALY averted was lower than each country's GDP per capita. Financial resources required for vaccination with rotavirus are higher than with HPV since both genders are vaccinated. While lifesaving benefits of rotavirus and HPV vaccines will be realized at different times, the number of lives saved over each target populations' lifetimes will be similar. Model-based analyses that use a standardized analytic approach and generate comparable outputs can enrich the priority-setting dialogue. Although new vaccines may be deemed cost-effective, other factors including affordability and distributional equity need to be considered in different settings. We caution that for priority setting in an individual country, more rigorous comparisons should be performed, using more comprehensive models and considering all relevant vaccines and delivery strategies.

Ecoregion-Based Conservation Planning in the Mediterranean: Dealing with Large-Scale Heterogeneity

PubMed Central

Giakoumi, Sylvaine; Sini, Maria; Gerovasileiou, Vasilis; Mazor, Tessa; Beher, Jutta; Possingham, Hugh P.; Abdulla, Ameer; Çinar, Melih Ertan; Dendrinos, Panagiotis; Gucu, Ali Cemal; Karamanlidis, Alexandros A.; Rodic, Petra; Panayotidis, Panayotis; Taskin, Ergun; Jaklin, Andrej; Voultsiadou, Eleni; Webster, Chloë; Zenetos, Argyro; Katsanevakis, Stelios

2013-01-01

Spatial priorities for the conservation of three key Mediterranean habitats, i.e. seagrass Posidonia oceanica meadows, coralligenous formations, and marine caves, were determined through a systematic planning approach. Available information on the distribution of these habitats across the entire Mediterranean Sea was compiled to produce basin-scale distribution maps. Conservation targets for each habitat type were set according to European Union guidelines. Surrogates were used to estimate the spatial variation of opportunity cost for commercial, non-commercial fishing, and aquaculture. Marxan conservation planning software was used to evaluate the comparative utility of two planning scenarios: (a) a whole-basin scenario, referring to selection of priority areas across the whole Mediterranean Sea, and (b) an ecoregional scenario, in which priority areas were selected within eight predefined ecoregions. Although both scenarios required approximately the same total area to be protected in order to achieve conservation targets, the opportunity cost differed between them. The whole-basin scenario yielded a lower opportunity cost, but the Alboran Sea ecoregion was not represented and priority areas were predominantly located in the Ionian, Aegean, and Adriatic Seas. In comparison, the ecoregional scenario resulted in a higher representation of ecoregions and a more even distribution of priority areas, albeit with a higher opportunity cost. We suggest that planning at the ecoregional level ensures better representativeness of the selected conservation features and adequate protection of species, functional, and genetic diversity across the basin. While there are several initiatives that identify priority areas in the Mediterranean Sea, our approach is novel as it combines three issues: (a) it is based on the distribution of habitats and not species, which was rarely the case in previous efforts, (b) it considers spatial variability of cost throughout this socioeconomically heterogeneous basin, and (c) it adopts ecoregions as the most appropriate level for large-scale planning. PMID:24155901

Notification: Preliminary Research to Evaluate Proposed Superfund Sites on the U.S. EPA's National Priorities List

EPA Pesticide Factsheets

Project #OPE-FY13-0018, April 4, 2013. The Office of Inspector General plans to begin preliminary research to evaluate proposed Superfund sites on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s National Priorities List.

Hydrogeologic framework and sampling design for an assessment of agricultural pesticides in ground water in Pennsylvania

USGS Publications Warehouse

Lindsey, Bruce D.; Bickford, Tammy M.

1999-01-01

State agencies responsible for regulating pesticides are required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to develop state management plans for specific pesticides. A key part of these management plans includes assessing the potential for contamination of ground water by pesticides throughout the state. As an example of how a statewide assessment could be implemented, a plan is presented for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to illustrate how a hydrogeologic framework can be used as a basis for sampling areas within a state with the highest likelihood of having elevated pesticide concentrations in ground water. The framework was created by subdividing the state into 20 areas on the basis of physiography and aquifer type. Each of these 20 hydrogeologic settings is relatively homogeneous with respect to aquifer susceptibility and pesticide use—factors that would be likely to affect pesticide concentrations in ground water. Existing data on atrazine occurrence in ground water was analyzed to determine (1) which areas of the state already have sufficient samples collected to make statistical comparisons among hydrogeologic settings, and (2) the effect of factors such as land use and aquifer characteristics on pesticide occurrence. The theoretical vulnerability and the results of the data analysis were used to rank each of the 20 hydrogeologic settings on the basis of vulnerability of ground water to contamination by pesticides. Example sampling plans are presented for nine of the hydrogeologic settings that lack sufficient data to assess vulnerability to contamination. Of the highest priority areas of the state, two out of four have been adequately sampled, one of the three areas of moderate to high priority has been adequately sampled, four of the nine areas of moderate to low priority have been adequately sampled, and none of the three low priority areas have been sampled.Sampling to date has shown that, even in the most vulnerable hydrogeologic settings, pesticide concentrations in ground water rarely exceed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Drinking Water Standards or Health Advisory Levels. Analyses of samples from 1,159 private water supplies reveal only 3 sites for which samples with concentrations of pesticides exceeded drinking-water standards. In most cases, samples with elevated concentrations could be traced to point sources at pesticide loading or mixing areas. These analyses included data from some of the most vulnerable areas of the state, indicating that it is highly unlikely that pesticide concentrations in water from wells in other areas of the state would exceed the drinking-water standards unless a point source of contamination were present. Analysis of existing data showed that water from wells in areas of the state underlain by carbonate (limestone and dolomite) bedrock, which commonly have a high percentage of corn production, was much more likely to have pesticides detected. Application of pesticides to the land surface generally has not caused concentrations of the five state priority pesticides in ground water to exceed health standards; however, this study has not evaluated the potential human health effects of mixtures of pesticides or pesticide degradation products in drinking water. This study also has not determined whether concentrations in ground water are stable, increasing, or decreasing.

Research priorities for shoulder surgery: results of the 2015 James Lind Alliance patient and clinician priority setting partnership.

PubMed

Rangan, Amar; Upadhaya, Sheela; Regan, Sandra; Toye, Francine; Rees, Jonathan L

2016-04-11

To run a UK based James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership for 'Surgery for Common Shoulder Problems'. This was a nationally funded and conducted process. It was organised from a musculoskeletal research centre and Biomedical Research Unit in Oxford. UK shoulder patients, carers and clinicians, involved in treating patients with shoulder pain and shoulder problems that might require surgery. These were national electronic and paper surveys capturing treatment uncertainties that are important to shoulder patients, carers and clinicians. The outcomes relevant to this study were the survey results and rankings. The process took 18 months to complete, with 371 participants contributing 404 in scope questions. The James Lind process then produced a final 10 research priorities and uncertainties that relate to the scope of 'Surgery for Common Shoulder Problems'. The final top 10 UK research priorities have been produced and are now being disseminated to partner organisations and funders to guide funding of shoulder research for the next 5-10 years on topics that are important to patients, their carers and clinicians. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/

Work-life balance in an industrial setting. Focus on advocacy.

PubMed

Dow-Clarke, R Anne

2002-02-01

1. Employers have a role in assisting workers to manage conflicting priorities of work and family. 2. Management support and sensitivity to family and home life responsibilities and flexible application of policies are believed to be key factors in promoting work-life balance in the workplace. 3. Occupational health nurses have a role in advocating for revised company policies to assist employees to achieve and maintain a work-life balance. The information provided in this article can be used to guide future evaluation for the reduction of barriers to employee work-life balance.

Optimizing Safety, Fidelity and Usability of an Intelligent Clinical Support Tool (ICST) For Acute Hospital Care: an Australian Case Study Using a Multi-Method Delphi Process.

PubMed

Botti, Mari; Redley, Bernice; Nguyen, Lemai; Coleman, Kimberley; Wickramasinghe, Nilmini

2015-01-01

This research focuses on a major health priority for Australia by addressing existing gaps in the implementation of nursing informatics solutions in healthcare. It serves to inform the successful deployment of IT solutions designed to support patient-centered, frontline acute healthcare delivery by multidisciplinary care teams. The outcomes can guide future evaluations of the contribution of IT solutions to the efficiency, safety and quality of care delivery in acute hospital settings.

Priority setting in health care: disentangling risk aversion from inequality aversion.

PubMed

Echazu, Luciana; Nocetti, Diego

2013-06-01

In this paper, we introduce a tractable social welfare function that is rich enough to disentangle attitudes towards risk in health outcomes from attitudes towards health inequalities across individuals. Given this preference specification, we evaluate how the introduction of uncertainty over the severity of illness and over the effectiveness of treatments affects the optimal allocation of healthcare resources. We show that the way in which uncertainty affects the optimal allocation within our proposed specification may differ sharply from that in the standard expected utility framework. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Quality of Care Measures for the Management of Unhealthy Alcohol Use

PubMed Central

Hepner, Kimberly A.; Watkins, Katherine E.; Farmer, Carrie M.; Rubenstein, Lisa; Pedersen, Eric R.; Pincus, Harold Alan

2017-01-01

There is a paucity of quality measures to assess the care for the range of unhealthy alcohol use, ranging from risky drinking to alcohol use disorders. Using a two-phase expert panel review process, we sought to develop an expanded set of quality of care measures for unhealthy alcohol use, focusing on outpatient care delivered in both primary care and specialty care settings. This process generated 25 candidate measures. Eight measures address screening and assessment, 11 address aspects of treatment, and six address follow-up. These quality measures represent high priority targets for future development, including creating detailed technical specifications and pilot testing them to evaluate their utility in terms of feasibility, reliability, and validity. PMID:28340902

Public purchasing and private priorities for healthcare in New Zealand.

PubMed

Howden-Chapman, P; Ashton, T

2000-11-01

The 1993 Health and Disability Services Act heralded a range of structural reforms in the New Zealand health care system. Despite these reforms considerable resources being spent on convincing consumers of their merits, have failed to gain widespread public approval. This paper examines two key issues that have arisen during the reform process. These are the difficulties associated with trying to set priorities in ways which are effective and politically acceptable, and the relationship between the public and private sectors. Unacknowledged conflicts of interest have helped to undermine the priority setting process. The discussion suggests that it may be increasingly difficult for any government in future to determine the allocation of resources without taking private sector interests and rising public concern into account. It remains to be seen which of these factors is more powerful.

The opportunities and challenges of multi-site evaluations: lessons from the jail diversion and trauma recovery national cross-site evaluation.

PubMed

Stainbrook, Kristin; Penney, Darby; Elwyn, Laura

2015-06-01

Multi-site evaluations, particularly of federally funded service programs, pose a special set of challenges for program evaluation. Not only are there contextual differences related to project location, there are often relatively few programmatic requirements, which results in variations in program models, target populations and services. The Jail Diversion and Trauma Recovery-Priority to Veterans (JDTR) National Cross-Site Evaluation was tasked with conducting a multi-site evaluation of thirteen grantee programs that varied along multiple domains. This article describes the use of a mixed methods evaluation design to understand the jail diversion programs and client outcomes for veterans with trauma, mental health and/or substance use problems. We discuss the challenges encountered in evaluating diverse programs, the benefits of the evaluation in the face of these challenges, and offer lessons learned for other evaluators undertaking this type of evaluation. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Health Care Priorities: Opinions of One State's Citizens and Legislators.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Jankel, Charlotte A.; And Others

1994-01-01

Reports a study that examined the attitudes of Georgia citizens and legislators toward funding for specific health care services and national health insurance. Legislators were less in favor of national health insurance than were citizens. Both groups set a high priority on providing a wide range of health care services to everyone. (SM)

Using Wildlife Species Richness to Identify Land Protection Priorities in California's Hardwood Woodlands

Treesearch

Robert S. Motroni; Daniel A. Airola; Robin K. Ma rose; Nancy D. Tosta

1991-01-01

A geographic information system was used to assess wildlife species richness (number of species) in valley-foothill hardwood habitats throughout California to set priorities for conservation attention. Species richness values were assessed and compared using three methods: one that included all species without considering canopy cover conditions and species preferences...

Setting numerical population objectives for priority landbird species

Treesearch

Kenneth V. Rosenberg; Peter J. Blancher

2005-01-01

Following the example of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan, deriving numerical population estimates and conservation targets for priority landbird species is considered a desirable, if not necessary, element of the Partners in Flight planning process. Methodology for deriving such estimates remains in its infancy, however, and the use of numerical population...

Ex situ conservation priorities for the wild relatives of potato (Solanum L. section Petota)

USDA-ARS?s Scientific Manuscript database

We analyzed the contemporary ex situ conservation coverage of the wild relatives of cultivated potato (Solanum section Petota) to set priorities and guide future collections and conservation. We conducted a gap analysis for 73 taxa involving seven, 63 and three species from the primary, secondary an...

Who Shall Not Be Treated: Public Attitudes on Setting Health Care Priorities by Person-Based Criteria in 28 Nations.

PubMed

Rogge, Jana; Kittel, Bernhard

2016-01-01

The principle of distributing health care according to medical need is being challenged by increasing costs. As a result, many countries have initiated a debate on the introduction of explicit priority regulations based on medical, economic and person-based criteria, or have already established such regulations. Previous research on individual attitudes towards setting health care priorities based on medical and economic criteria has revealed consistent results, whereas studies on the use of person-based criteria have generated controversial findings. This paper examines citizens' attitudes towards three person-based priority criteria, patients' smoking habits, age and being the parent of a young child. Using data from the ISSP Health Module (2011) in 28 countries, logistic regression analysis demonstrates that self-interest as well as socio-demographic predictors significantly influence respondents' attitudes towards the use of person-based criteria for health care prioritization. This study contributes to resolving the controversial findings on person-based criteria by using a larger country sample and by controlling for country-level differences with fixed effects models.

48 CFR 19.502-3 - Partial set-asides.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... non-set-aside part of the acquisition shall have first priority with respect to negotiations for the... 48 Federal Acquisition Regulations System 1 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Partial set-asides. 19.502... SOCIOECONOMIC PROGRAMS SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS Set-Asides for Small Business 19.502-3 Partial set-asides. (a...

Institutional Priority for Diversity at Christian Institutions

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Paredes-Collins, Kristin

2009-01-01

This evaluative study explored the relationship between institutional priority for diversity and minority enrollment at four schools within the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities, a consortium of Christian institutions. This institutional evaluation utilized public resources in order to gather descriptive data on minority enrollment…

Comprehensive evaluation on transit signal priority system impacts using field observed traffic data

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

2007-06-15

To improve the level of service for Community Transit (CT) buses, the South Snohomish Regional Transit Signal Priority (SS-RTSP) project has been launched. To understand the overall benefit of this project, the SS-RTSP system was tested and evaluated...

Developing nursing and midwifery research priorities: a Health Service Executive (HSE) North West study.

PubMed

Parlour, Randal; Slater, Paul

2014-06-01

The primary purpose of this study was to identify research priorities for nurses and midwives across the Health Service Executive (HSE) North West region. The rationale for the study was underlined during meetings of HSE North West Directors of Nursing and Midwifery in January 2011. It was agreed that a more strategic approach to generating synergy among nursing and midwifery research, evaluation, and evidence-based practice should be developed through the Nursing and Midwifery Planning and Development Unit. The research design was founded upon collaborative processes for consensus building that included the Delphi technique and nominal group technique. The study sample included a panel of experts. Data were collected between March 2011 and December 2011. Findings from this study validate the efficacy of the research methodology in enabling the effective identification of priority areas for research. These include: (a) an evaluation of the impact of postgraduate nursing and midwifery education programs focusing upon patient, professional, and organizational outcomes; (b) development and evaluation of an effective culture of nurse- and midwife-led audit across all services within a Regional Health Trust in Ireland; (c) an examination of the efficacy of approaches to clinical supervision within the context of the Irish health system; (d) an evaluation of the impact of an Advanced Nurse Practitioner role in supporting the effective management of long-term conditions within the context of Regional Health Trust primary care settings in Ireland; and (e) Supporting and developing an ethical framework for nursing and midwifery research within a Regional Health Trust in Ireland. It is anticipated that future work, outlined within this paper, will lead to important improvements in patient care and outcomes. Furthermore, this study provides evidence that a strong nursing and midwifery research agenda can be established upon genuine collaborations and partnerships across varying levels of research knowledge and skills, but with a shared purpose and shared values. © 2014 Sigma Theta Tau International.

Relevance or Excellence? Setting Research Priorities for Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Humanitarian Settings

PubMed Central

Tol, Wietse A; Patel, Vikram; Tomlinson, Mark; Baingana, Florence; Galappatti, Ananda; Silove, Derrick; Sondorp, Egbert; van Ommeren, Mark; Wessells, Michael G; Catherine, Panter-Brick

2012-01-01

Background: Humanitarian crises are associated with an increase in mental disorders and psychological distress. Despite the emerging consensus on intervention strategies in humanitarian settings, the field of mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) in humanitarian settings lacks a consensus-based research agenda. Methods: From August 2009 to February 2010, we contacted policymakers, academic researchers, and humanitarian aid workers, and conducted nine semistructured focus group discussions with 114 participants in three locations (Peru, Uganda, and Nepal), in both the capitals and remote humanitarian settings. Local stakeholders representing a range of academic expertise (psychiatry, psychology, social work, child protection, and medical anthropology) and organizations (governments, universities, nongovernmental organizations, and UN agencies) were asked to identify priority questions for MHPSS research in humanitarian settings, and to discuss factors that hamper and facilitate research. Results: Thematic analyses of transcripts show that participants broadly agreed on prioritized research themes in the following order: (1) the prevalence and burden of mental health and psychosocial difficulties in humanitarian settings, (2) how MHPSS implementation can be improved, (3) evaluation of specific MHPSS interventions, (4) the determinants of mental health and psychological distress, and (5) improved research methods and processes. Rather than differences in research themes across countries, what emerged was a disconnect between different groups of stakeholders regarding research processes: the perceived lack of translation of research findings into actual policy and programs; misunderstanding of research methods by aid workers; different appreciation of the time needed to conduct research; and disputed universality of research constructs. Conclusions: To advance a collaborative research agenda, actors in this field need to bridge the perceived disconnect between the goals of “relevance” and “excellence.” Research needs to be more sensitive to questions and concerns arising from humanitarian interventions, and practitioners need to take research findings into account in designing interventions. (Harv Rev Psychiatry 2012;20:25–36.) PMID:22335180