4.3 Article

Health Technology Assessment: Global Advocacy and Local Realities Comment on Priority Setting for Universal Health Coverage: We Need Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes, Not Just More Evidence on Cost-Effectiveness

出版社

KERMAN UNIV MEDICAL SCIENCES
DOI: 10.15171/ijhpm.2016.118

关键词

Deliberation; Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA); Governance; Efficiency; Universal Coverage

资金

  1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
  2. Department for International Development (UK)
  3. Rockefeller Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) can help countries attain and sustain universal health coverage (UHC), as long as it is context-specific and considered within deliberative processes at the country level. Institutionalising robust deliberative processes requires significant time and resources, however, and countries often begin by demanding evidence (including local CEA evidence as well as evidence about local values), whilst striving to strengthen the governance structures and technical capacities with which to generate, consider and act on such evidence. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), such capacities could be developed initially around a small technical unit in the health ministry or health insurer. The role of networks, development partners, and global norm setting organisations is crucial in supporting the necessary capacities.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据