Bringing 'the public' into health technology assessment and coverage policy decisions: From principles to practice

被引:150
作者
Abelson, Julia [1 ]
Giacomini, Mita
Lehoux, Pascale
Gauvin, Francois-Pieffe
机构
[1] McMaster Univ, Hlth Sci Ctr, Ctr Hlth Econ & Policy Anal, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada
[2] Univ Montreal, Dept Adm Sante, Montreal, PQ H3C 3J7, Canada
基金
加拿大健康研究院;
关键词
public involvement; accountability; health technology assessment; decision-making;
D O I
10.1016/j.healthpol.2006.07.009
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
Those making health care coverage decisions rely on health technology assessment (HTA) for crucial technical information. But coverage decision-making, and the HTA that informs it, are also inherently political. They involve the values and judgments of a range of stakeholders as well as the public. Moreover, governments are politically accountable for their resource allocation decisions. Canadian policy makers are at an early stage in the design of legitimate mechanisms for the public to contribute to, and to be apprised of, HTA and coverage decisions. As they consider the options, questions arise about whom to involve (e.g., which publics), how to engage them (e.g., through what public involvement or accountability mechanisms), and for what purpose (e.g., to inform the public of decisions and their rationales, or to have the public directly affect those decisions). Often key concepts, such as the difference between public accountability and public participation, are not well articulated or distinguished in these debates. Guidance is needed regarding both rationales and methods for involving the public in HTA and technology coverage decisions. We offer a framework that clearly distinguishes specific roles for the public, and relates them to several layers of policy analysis and policy making where 'the public' may engage in different tasks. The framework offers a menu of choices for policy makers contemplating changes to public involvement, as well as a model that can be used to characterize and analyze different approaches across jurisdictions. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:37 / 50
页数:14
相关论文
共 65 条
[1]   Does deliberation make a difference? Results from a citizens panel study of health goals priority setting [J].
Abelson, J ;
Eyles, J ;
McLeod, CB ;
Collins, P ;
McMullan, C ;
Forest, PG .
HEALTH POLICY, 2003, 66 (01) :95-106
[2]  
ABELSON J, 1995, CANADIAN MED ASS J, V153, P3
[3]  
ABELSON J, 2004, CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT 1
[4]   Health consumer groups in the UK: a new social movement? [J].
Allsop, J ;
Jones, K ;
Baggott, R .
SOCIOLOGY OF HEALTH & ILLNESS, 2004, 26 (06) :737-756
[5]  
Andersen I., 1999, SCI PUBL POLICY, V26, P331, DOI [10.3152/147154399781782301, DOI 10.3152/147154399781782301]
[6]  
[Anonymous], MANAGING PUBLIC INVO
[7]   GIVING CONSUMERS A SAY IN POLICY DEVELOPMENT - INFLUENCING POLICY OR JUST BEING HEARD [J].
ARONSON, J .
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY-ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES, 1993, 19 (04) :367-378
[8]   The dialectics of accountability for performance in public management reform [J].
Aucoin, P ;
Heintzman, R .
INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCES, 2000, 66 (01) :45-55
[9]  
BANTA HD, 1995, ORG HLTH CARE TECHNO