Skip to main content

Volume 16 Supplement 1

Priority Setting in Global Health

Research

Publication of this supplement has been supported by sponsorship from Mark O’Friel, the Brinson Foundation, and the Payne Family Foundation. Information about the source of funding for publication charges can be found in the individual articles. The articles have undergone the journal's standard peer review process for supplements. DEB and RD are authors of an article submitted in this supplement. Both confirm that they were not part of the review process for their manuscript.

Boston, MA, USA5-6 October 2016

Edited by David E. Bloom and Rashmi Dayalu.

  2. Multiple technologies, procedures and programs call for fairly-based decisions for prioritization of healthcare interventions. There is a diversity of perspectives of what constitutes a legitimate decision, wh...

    Authors: Mireille M. Goetghebeur and Marjo S. Cellier
    Citation: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2018 16(Suppl 1):54
    Content type: Review Published on:

  3. As a country with significant resource constraints, a fair and efficient health priority setting should be at the cornerstone of Ethiopia’s commitment to attain universal health coverage by 2035. This paper dr...

    Authors: Mahlet Kifle Habtemariam and Sentayehu Tsegaye Semegn
    Citation: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2018 16(Suppl 1):46
    Content type: Review Published on:

  4. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is a structured decision-making process that offers greater flexibility to incorporate multiple objectives than cost-effectiveness analysis or benefit–cost analysis.

    Authors: Mark Jit
    Citation: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2018 16(Suppl 1):45
    Content type: Commentary Published on:

  6. This brief perspective highlights the importance of decision maker buy-in and ownership through stakeholder engagement in the co-construction of the multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) model. A brief histo...

    Authors: Praveen Thokala and Guruprasad Madhavan
    Citation: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2018 16(Suppl 1):0
    Content type: Commentary Published on:

  7. Priority setting in a climate of diverse needs and limited resources is one of the most significant challenges faced by health care policymakers. This paper develops and applies a comprehensive multi-criteria ...

    Authors: Rashmi Dayalu, Elizabeth T. Cafiero-Fonseca, Victoria Y. Fan, Heather Schofield and David E. Bloom
    Citation: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2018 16(Suppl 1):52
    Content type: Research Published on:

  8. Preference-based social welfare functions (pbSWF) perform better at reconciling competing personal and social goals than typical forms of MCDA. Its virtues are (a) its respect for people’s own judgments about ...

    Authors: J. P. Sevilla
    Citation: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2018 16(Suppl 1):41
    Content type: Commentary Published on:

  9. This commentary utilizes the lens of public opinion research in health to suggest ideas for best integrating public input into multi-criteria decisions analysis (MCDA) approaches. The field of public opinion r...

    Authors: Gillian K. SteelFisher
    Citation: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2018 16(Suppl 1):39
    Content type: Commentary Published on:

  10. Multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) has been proposed as a method for determining the criteria to be used in health technology assessment. A standard criticism of MCDA is that it lacks attention to secu...

    Authors: Norman Daniels
    Citation: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2018 16(Suppl 1):51
    Content type: Commentary Published on:

  11. Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) has the potential to bring more structure and transparency to health technology assessment (HTA). The objective of this paper is to highlight key methodological and pract...

    Authors: Kevin Marsh, Praveen Thokala, Sitaporn Youngkong and Kalipso Chalkidou
    Citation: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2018 16(Suppl 1):43
    Content type: Review Published on:

  13. All healthcare systems face problems of justice and efficiency related to setting priorities for allocating limited financial resources. Therefore, explicit decision-making in healthcare depicted as a continuu...

    Authors: Héctor E. Castro, Ornella Moreno-Mattar and Juan C. Rivillas
    Citation: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2018 16(Suppl 1):47
    Content type: Review Published on:

    The Correction to this article has been published in Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2020 18:42

  14. Decision making in health requires the use of sound evidence and context-specific information, guided by a priority setting methodology or framework. For noncommunicable disease (NCD) prevention and control, a...

    Authors: Silvana Luciani and Anselm Hennis
    Citation: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2018 16(Suppl 1):53
    Content type: Commentary Published on:

  15. Cost–benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis place limits on the dimensions of value that the models can incorporate. Cost–benefit analysis requires monetization of all measures of value (including life), a ta...

    Authors: Charles Phelps and Guruprasad Madhavan
    Citation: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2018 16(Suppl 1):48
    Content type: Research Published on:

  17. Prioritization in healthcare is particularly sensitive to subjective biases and data asymmetry. Yet making data-based and objective decisions are critical to optimizing long term individual and societal benefi...

    Authors: Michael Watson
    Citation: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2018 16(Suppl 1):40
    Content type: Commentary Published on:
Submit manuscript

Annual Journal Metrics

Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation

ISSN: 1478-7547

Contact us