ASSESSING THE IMPACTS OF CITIZEN DELIBERATIONS ON THE HEALTH TECHNOLOGY PROCESS

被引:29
作者
Abelson, Julia [1 ]
Bombard, Yvonne [2 ,3 ]
Gauvin, Francois-Pierre [4 ]
Simeonov, Dorina [5 ]
Boesveld, Sarah [6 ]
机构
[1] McMaster Univ, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Ctr Hlth Econ & Policy Anal, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[2] Yale Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, New Haven, CT USA
[3] Memorial Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Ctr Hlth Policy & Outcomes Clin Genet Serv, New York, NY USA
[4] McMaster Hlth Forum, Evidence Synth & Francophone Outreach, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[5] Hlth Council Canada, Toronto, ON, Canada
[6] McMaster Univ, Ctr Hlth Econ & Policy Anal, Hamilton, ON, Canada
关键词
Health technology assessment; Public engagement; Public involvement; Deliberative methods; Health policy; Decision making; Social values; PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT; CONSUMER INVOLVEMENT; ASSESSMENT PROGRAM; XENOTRANSPLANTATION; CONSULTATION; CANADA; VALUES;
D O I
10.1017/S0266462313000299
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives: We assessed the impacts of a Citizens' Reference Panel on the deliberations of a provincial health technology advisory committee and its secretariat, which produce, recommendations for the use of health technologies in Ontario, Canada. Methods: A fourteen-member citizens' reference panel was convened five times between February 2009 and May 2010 to participate in informed, facilitated discussions to inform the assessment of individual technologies and provincial health technology assessment processes more generally. Qualitative data collection methods were used to document observed and perceived impacts of the citizens' panel on the health technology assessment (HTA) process. Results: Panel impacts were observed for all technologies reviewed, at two different stages in the HTA process, and represented macro- (raising awareness) and micro-level (informing recommendations) impacts. These impacts were shaped by periodic opportunities for direct and brokered exchange between the Panel and the expert advisory committee to clarify roles, foster accountability, and build trust. Our findings offer new insights about one of the main considerations in the design of deliberative participatory structures-how to maintain the independence of a citizens' panel while ensuring that their input is considered at key junctures in the HTA process. Conclusions: Citizens' panels can exert various impacts on the HTA process. Ensuring these types of structures include opportunities for direct exchange between citizens and experts, to clarify roles, promote accountability, and build trust will facilitate their impacts in a variety of settings.
引用
收藏
页码:282 / 289
页数:8
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]   Bringing 'the public' into health technology assessment and coverage policy decisions: From principles to practice [J].
Abelson, Julia ;
Giacomini, Mita ;
Lehoux, Pascale ;
Gauvin, Francois-Pieffe .
HEALTH POLICY, 2007, 82 (01) :37-50
[2]  
[Anonymous], EVALUATION PUBLIC IN
[3]   What Is Public Deliberation? [J].
Blacksher, Erika ;
Diebel, Alice ;
Forest, Pierre-Gerlier ;
Goold, Susan Dorr ;
Abelson, Julia .
HASTINGS CENTER REPORT, 2012, 42 (02) :14-17
[4]   Citizens' Values Regarding Research With Stored Samples From Newborn Screening in Canada [J].
Bombard, Yvonne ;
Miller, Fiona A. ;
Hayeems, Robin Z. ;
Carroll, June C. ;
Avard, Denise ;
Wilson, Brenda J. ;
Little, Julian ;
Bytautas, Jessica P. ;
Allanson, Judith ;
Axler, Renata ;
Giguere, Yves ;
Chakraborty, Pranesh .
PEDIATRICS, 2012, 129 (02) :239-247
[5]   Eliciting ethical and social values in health technology assessment: A participatory approach [J].
Bombard, Yvonne ;
Abelson, Julia ;
Simeonov, Donna ;
Gauvin, Francois-Pierre .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2011, 73 (01) :135-144
[6]  
Davies C., 2006, CITIZENS CTR DELIBER, DOI DOI 10.46692/9781847421678
[7]  
Davies Celia, 2009, PATIENTS PUBLIC PRIO, P129
[8]   Assessing the quality of democratic deliberation: A case study of public deliberation on the ethics of surrogate consent for research [J].
De Vries, Raymond ;
Stanczyk, Aimee ;
Wall, Ian F. ;
Uhlmann, Rebecca ;
Damschroder, Laura J. ;
Kim, Scott Y. .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2010, 70 (12) :1896-1903
[9]   Animal spare parts? A Canadian public consultation on xenotransplantation [J].
Einsiedel, EF ;
Ross, H .
SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS, 2002, 8 (04) :579-591
[10]   Moving cautiously: Public involvement and the health technology assessment community [J].
Gauvin, Francois-Pierre ;
Abelson, Julia ;
Giacomini, Mita ;
Eyles, John ;
Levis, John N. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2011, 27 (01) :43-49