Cargando…

Evaluation framework study assessing the role, applicability and adherence to good practice of planning support tools for allocation of development aid for health in low-income and middle-income countries

OBJECTIVES: Allocation of development aid for health is controversial and challenging. In recent years, several planning-software tools have promised to help decision-makers align resource allocation with their objectives, more clearly connect prioritisation to evidence and local circumstances, and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Megiddo, Itamar, Blair, Shona, Sabei, Davood, Ruiz, Francis, Morton, Alexander D
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10347503/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37438065
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069590
_version_ 1785073561589776384
author Megiddo, Itamar
Blair, Shona
Sabei, Davood
Ruiz, Francis
Morton, Alexander D
author_facet Megiddo, Itamar
Blair, Shona
Sabei, Davood
Ruiz, Francis
Morton, Alexander D
author_sort Megiddo, Itamar
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Allocation of development aid for health is controversial and challenging. In recent years, several planning-software tools have promised to help decision-makers align resource allocation with their objectives, more clearly connect prioritisation to evidence and local circumstances, and increase transparency and comparability. We aim to explore these tools to provide insight into their fitness for purpose and suggest future directions to fulfil that promise. DESIGN: We identified seven tools that met the inclusion criteria and developed an evaluation framework to compare them along two dimensions for assessing fitness for purpose: ability to produce analyses adhering to principles laid out in the International Decisions Support Initiative (iDSI) Reference Case for health economic evaluations; and resources required, including expertise and time. We extracted information from documentation and tool use and sent this information to tool developers for confirmation. RESULTS: We categorise the tools into evidence-generating ones, evidence-syntheses ones and process support ones. Tools’ fitness for purpose varies by the context, technical capacity and time limitation. The tools adhere to several reference case principles but often not to all of them. The source and underlying assumptions of prepopulated data are often opaque. Comparing vertical interventions across diseases and health system strengthening ones remains challenging. CONCLUSIONS: The plethora of tools that aid priority setting in different ways is encouraging. Developers and users should place further emphasis on their ability to produce analyses that adhere to prioritisation principles. Opportunities for further development include using evidence-generating tools and multicriteria decision analysis approaches complimentarily. However, maintaining tool simplicity should also be considered to allow wider access.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10347503
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103475032023-07-15 Evaluation framework study assessing the role, applicability and adherence to good practice of planning support tools for allocation of development aid for health in low-income and middle-income countries Megiddo, Itamar Blair, Shona Sabei, Davood Ruiz, Francis Morton, Alexander D BMJ Open Global Health OBJECTIVES: Allocation of development aid for health is controversial and challenging. In recent years, several planning-software tools have promised to help decision-makers align resource allocation with their objectives, more clearly connect prioritisation to evidence and local circumstances, and increase transparency and comparability. We aim to explore these tools to provide insight into their fitness for purpose and suggest future directions to fulfil that promise. DESIGN: We identified seven tools that met the inclusion criteria and developed an evaluation framework to compare them along two dimensions for assessing fitness for purpose: ability to produce analyses adhering to principles laid out in the International Decisions Support Initiative (iDSI) Reference Case for health economic evaluations; and resources required, including expertise and time. We extracted information from documentation and tool use and sent this information to tool developers for confirmation. RESULTS: We categorise the tools into evidence-generating ones, evidence-syntheses ones and process support ones. Tools’ fitness for purpose varies by the context, technical capacity and time limitation. The tools adhere to several reference case principles but often not to all of them. The source and underlying assumptions of prepopulated data are often opaque. Comparing vertical interventions across diseases and health system strengthening ones remains challenging. CONCLUSIONS: The plethora of tools that aid priority setting in different ways is encouraging. Developers and users should place further emphasis on their ability to produce analyses that adhere to prioritisation principles. Opportunities for further development include using evidence-generating tools and multicriteria decision analysis approaches complimentarily. However, maintaining tool simplicity should also be considered to allow wider access. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-07-12 /pmc/articles/PMC10347503/ /pubmed/37438065 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069590 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Global Health
Megiddo, Itamar
Blair, Shona
Sabei, Davood
Ruiz, Francis
Morton, Alexander D
Evaluation framework study assessing the role, applicability and adherence to good practice of planning support tools for allocation of development aid for health in low-income and middle-income countries
title Evaluation framework study assessing the role, applicability and adherence to good practice of planning support tools for allocation of development aid for health in low-income and middle-income countries
title_full Evaluation framework study assessing the role, applicability and adherence to good practice of planning support tools for allocation of development aid for health in low-income and middle-income countries
title_fullStr Evaluation framework study assessing the role, applicability and adherence to good practice of planning support tools for allocation of development aid for health in low-income and middle-income countries
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation framework study assessing the role, applicability and adherence to good practice of planning support tools for allocation of development aid for health in low-income and middle-income countries
title_short Evaluation framework study assessing the role, applicability and adherence to good practice of planning support tools for allocation of development aid for health in low-income and middle-income countries
title_sort evaluation framework study assessing the role, applicability and adherence to good practice of planning support tools for allocation of development aid for health in low-income and middle-income countries
topic Global Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10347503/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37438065
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069590
work_keys_str_mv AT megiddoitamar evaluationframeworkstudyassessingtheroleapplicabilityandadherencetogoodpracticeofplanningsupporttoolsforallocationofdevelopmentaidforhealthinlowincomeandmiddleincomecountries
AT blairshona evaluationframeworkstudyassessingtheroleapplicabilityandadherencetogoodpracticeofplanningsupporttoolsforallocationofdevelopmentaidforhealthinlowincomeandmiddleincomecountries
AT sabeidavood evaluationframeworkstudyassessingtheroleapplicabilityandadherencetogoodpracticeofplanningsupporttoolsforallocationofdevelopmentaidforhealthinlowincomeandmiddleincomecountries
AT ruizfrancis evaluationframeworkstudyassessingtheroleapplicabilityandadherencetogoodpracticeofplanningsupporttoolsforallocationofdevelopmentaidforhealthinlowincomeandmiddleincomecountries
AT mortonalexanderd evaluationframeworkstudyassessingtheroleapplicabilityandadherencetogoodpracticeofplanningsupporttoolsforallocationofdevelopmentaidforhealthinlowincomeandmiddleincomecountries