Is cost-effectiveness analysis preferred to severity of disease as the main guiding principle in priority setting in resource poor settings? The case of Uganda

Table 5 Test for associations between responses to the three scenarios and the respondents' characteristics

Characteristics	Odds ratios(confidence intervals)
	Scenario 1	Scenario 2	Scenario 3
Age	0.94 (.47–1.88)	1.30 (.67–2.48)	1.17 (.67–2.03)
Designation	1.99 (.56–7.12)	0.24 (.05–1.08)	1.91 (.86–4.28)
Level of work	0.77 (.29–2.04)	1.43 (.57–3.61)	1.12 (.56–2.23)
Respondent consider priority setting as part of there work	0.82 (.22–3.10)	1.53 (.44–5.30)	0.55 (.13–2.20)

Reference categories: Age =<35 years; Designation = health worker Respondent consider priority setting as part of their duty Level of work = Respondent works at national level

ISSN: 1478-7547