Cargando…

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"

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, howe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chalkidou, Kalipso, Li, Ryan, Culyer, Anthony J., Glassman, Amanda, Hofman, Karen J., Teerawattananon, Yot
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Kerman University of Medical Sciences 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5384986/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28812807
http://dx.doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2016.118
_version_ 1782520521135489024
author Chalkidou, Kalipso
Li, Ryan
Culyer, Anthony J.
Glassman, Amanda
Hofman, Karen J.
Teerawattananon, Yot
author_facet Chalkidou, Kalipso
Li, Ryan
Culyer, Anthony J.
Glassman, Amanda
Hofman, Karen J.
Teerawattananon, Yot
author_sort Chalkidou, Kalipso
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5384986
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Kerman University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53849862017-04-11 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" Chalkidou, Kalipso Li, Ryan Culyer, Anthony J. Glassman, Amanda Hofman, Karen J. Teerawattananon, Yot Int J Health Policy Manag Commentary 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. Kerman University of Medical Sciences 2016-08-29 /pmc/articles/PMC5384986/ /pubmed/28812807 http://dx.doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2016.118 Text en © 2017 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Commentary
Chalkidou, Kalipso
Li, Ryan
Culyer, Anthony J.
Glassman, Amanda
Hofman, Karen J.
Teerawattananon, Yot
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"
title 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"
title_full 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"
title_fullStr 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"
title_full_unstemmed 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"
title_short 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"
title_sort 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"
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5384986/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28812807
http://dx.doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2016.118
work_keys_str_mv AT chalkidoukalipso healthtechnologyassessmentglobaladvocacyandlocalrealitiescommentonprioritysettingforuniversalhealthcoverageweneedevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesnotjustmoreevidenceoncosteffectiveness
AT liryan healthtechnologyassessmentglobaladvocacyandlocalrealitiescommentonprioritysettingforuniversalhealthcoverageweneedevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesnotjustmoreevidenceoncosteffectiveness
AT culyeranthonyj healthtechnologyassessmentglobaladvocacyandlocalrealitiescommentonprioritysettingforuniversalhealthcoverageweneedevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesnotjustmoreevidenceoncosteffectiveness
AT glassmanamanda healthtechnologyassessmentglobaladvocacyandlocalrealitiescommentonprioritysettingforuniversalhealthcoverageweneedevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesnotjustmoreevidenceoncosteffectiveness
AT hofmankarenj healthtechnologyassessmentglobaladvocacyandlocalrealitiescommentonprioritysettingforuniversalhealthcoverageweneedevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesnotjustmoreevidenceoncosteffectiveness
AT teerawattananonyot healthtechnologyassessmentglobaladvocacyandlocalrealitiescommentonprioritysettingforuniversalhealthcoverageweneedevidenceinformeddeliberativeprocessesnotjustmoreevidenceoncosteffectiveness