Public engagement in priority-setting: results from a pan-Canadian survey of decision-makers in cancer control
| Autor: | Mona Sabharwal, Stuart Peacock, Craig Mitton, Colene Bentley, Michael M. Burgess, Jeffrey S Hoch, Syed Azizur Rahman, Victoria Schuckel, Carol Sawka, Andy Coldman, Dean A. Regier, Stirling Bryan, Jennifer L. Gibson, Ellen Chesney |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2014 |
| Předmět: |
Budgets
Canada Health (social science) Clinical effectiveness Cost-Benefit Analysis Decision Making Odds History and Philosophy of Science Cancer control Neoplasms Health care Humans Public engagement Health policy Priority setting Evidence-Based Medicine Health Care Rationing business.industry Health Priorities Health Policy Community Participation Public relations 3. Good health Socioeconomic Factors Normative business Psychology Needs Assessment |
| Zdroj: | Social sciencemedicine (1982). 122 |
| ISSN: | 1873-5347 |
| Popis: | Decision-makers are challenged to incorporate public input into priority-setting decisions. We conducted a pan-Canadian survey of decision-makers in cancer control to investigate the types of evidence, especially evidence supplied by the public, that are utilized in health care priority-setting. We further examined how normative attitudes and contextual factors influence the use of public engagement as evidence at the committee level. Administered between November and December 2012, 67 respondents from 117 invited individuals participated in the survey. The results indicated that public engagement was infrequently utilized compared to clinical effectiveness evidence or cost evidence. General positive agreement between normative attitudes towards the use of evidence and the frequency of evidence utilization was observed, but absence of correlative agreement was found for the types of evidence that are supplied by the general public and for cost-effectiveness inputs. Regression analyses suggested that public engagement was unevenly utilized between jurisdictions and that educational background and barriers to implementing public input may decrease the odds of using public engagement as evidence. We recommend that institutions establish a link between committee members' normative attitudes for using public engagement and its real-world utilization. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full Text from ScienceDirect