Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorNorheim, Ole Frithjofen_US
dc.contributor.authorBaltussen, Roben_US
dc.contributor.authorJohri, Miraen_US
dc.contributor.authorChisholm, Danen_US
dc.contributor.authorNord, Eriken_US
dc.contributor.authorBrock, Dan W.en_US
dc.contributor.authorCarlsson, Peren_US
dc.contributor.authorCookson, Richarden_US
dc.contributor.authorDaniels, Normanen_US
dc.contributor.authorDanis, Marionen_US
dc.contributor.authorFleurbaey, Marcen_US
dc.contributor.authorJohansson, Kjell Arneen_US
dc.contributor.authorKapiriri, Lydiaen_US
dc.contributor.authorLittlejohns, Peteren_US
dc.contributor.authorMbeeli, Thomasen_US
dc.contributor.authorRao, Krishna D.en_US
dc.contributor.authorEdejer, Tessa Tan-Torresen_US
dc.contributor.authorWikler, Danen_US
dc.description.abstractThis Guidance for Priority Setting in Health Care (GPS-Health), initiated by the World Health Organization, offers a comprehensive map of equity criteria that are relevant to health care priority setting and should be considered in addition to cost-effectiveness analysis. The guidance, in the form of a checklist, is especially targeted at decision makers who set priorities at national and sub-national levels, and those who interpret findings from cost-effectiveness analysis. It is also targeted at researchers conducting cost-effectiveness analysis to improve reporting of their results in the light of these other criteria. The guidance was develop through a series of expert consultation meetings and involved three steps: i) methods and normative concepts were identified through a systematic review; ii) the review findings were critically assessed in the expert consultation meetings which resulted in a draft checklist of normative criteria; iii) the checklist was validated though an extensive hearing process with input from a range of relevant stakeholders. The GPS-Health incorporates criteria related to the disease an intervention targets (severity of disease, capacity to benefit, and past health loss); characteristics of social groups an intervention targets (socioeconomic status, area of living, gender; race, ethnicity, religion and sexual orientation); and non-health consequences of an intervention (financial protection, economic productivity, and care for others).en_US
dc.publisherBioMed Centraleng
dc.rightsAttribution CC BYeng
dc.subjectPriority settingeng
dc.subjectResource allocationeng
dc.subjectPopulation healtheng
dc.titleGuidance on priority setting in health care (GPS-Health): the inclusion of equity criteria not captured by cost-effectiveness analysisen_US
dc.typePeer reviewed
dc.typeJournal article
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2014 Norheim et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
dc.rights.holderOle F Norheim et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
dc.source.journalCost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation

Files in this item


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution CC BY
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution CC BY