Involving the public in priority setting

a case study using discrete choice experiments

Verity Watson, Andrew Carnon, Mandy Ryan, Derek Cox

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Health-care organizations need to prioritize their resource use and should incorporate the public's preferences into their priority setting process. METHODS: We apply a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to obtain weights, from the public, for use in a priority setting exercise. Ten attributes were chosen: location of care, public consultation, use of technology, service availability, patient involvement, management of care, evidence of effectiveness, health gain, risk avoidance and priority area. From the DCE responses, weighted benefit scores were calculated and used to rank development bids from across a health-care organization. RESULTS: Sixty-eight members of the public completed the DCE. All attributes except risk avoidance were significant. The most important attribute levels were a large health gain to many people: care being provided in teams, using latest or cutting-edge technology and 24 h service availability. Local priorities were valued higher than national priorities. Ninety-five bids were ranked in order of overall score. The ranked list of development bids provided a useful tool to inform prioritization decisions. CONCLUSIONS: DCEs can offer a theoretically valid and practical means of incorporating the views of the public in an accessible, transparent and streamlined decision-making process when health-care organizations are prioritizing their resources.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)253-260
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Public Health
Volume34
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2012

Fingerprint

Organizations
Delivery of Health Care
Technology
Patient Participation
Health
Decision Making
Referral and Consultation
Weights and Measures

Keywords

  • economics
  • health services
  • metods

Cite this

Involving the public in priority setting : a case study using discrete choice experiments. / Watson, Verity; Carnon, Andrew; Ryan, Mandy; Cox, Derek.

In: Journal of Public Health, Vol. 34, No. 2, 06.2012, p. 253-260.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{666810deaa584f32ac41ac57d77ccbfb,
title = "Involving the public in priority setting: a case study using discrete choice experiments",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Health-care organizations need to prioritize their resource use and should incorporate the public's preferences into their priority setting process. METHODS: We apply a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to obtain weights, from the public, for use in a priority setting exercise. Ten attributes were chosen: location of care, public consultation, use of technology, service availability, patient involvement, management of care, evidence of effectiveness, health gain, risk avoidance and priority area. From the DCE responses, weighted benefit scores were calculated and used to rank development bids from across a health-care organization. RESULTS: Sixty-eight members of the public completed the DCE. All attributes except risk avoidance were significant. The most important attribute levels were a large health gain to many people: care being provided in teams, using latest or cutting-edge technology and 24 h service availability. Local priorities were valued higher than national priorities. Ninety-five bids were ranked in order of overall score. The ranked list of development bids provided a useful tool to inform prioritization decisions. CONCLUSIONS: DCEs can offer a theoretically valid and practical means of incorporating the views of the public in an accessible, transparent and streamlined decision-making process when health-care organizations are prioritizing their resources.",
keywords = "economics, health services, metods",
author = "Verity Watson and Andrew Carnon and Mandy Ryan and Derek Cox",
year = "2012",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1093/pubmed/fdr102",
language = "English",
volume = "34",
pages = "253--260",
journal = "Journal of Public Health",
issn = "1741-3842",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Involving the public in priority setting

T2 - a case study using discrete choice experiments

AU - Watson, Verity

AU - Carnon, Andrew

AU - Ryan, Mandy

AU - Cox, Derek

PY - 2012/6

Y1 - 2012/6

N2 - BACKGROUND: Health-care organizations need to prioritize their resource use and should incorporate the public's preferences into their priority setting process. METHODS: We apply a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to obtain weights, from the public, for use in a priority setting exercise. Ten attributes were chosen: location of care, public consultation, use of technology, service availability, patient involvement, management of care, evidence of effectiveness, health gain, risk avoidance and priority area. From the DCE responses, weighted benefit scores were calculated and used to rank development bids from across a health-care organization. RESULTS: Sixty-eight members of the public completed the DCE. All attributes except risk avoidance were significant. The most important attribute levels were a large health gain to many people: care being provided in teams, using latest or cutting-edge technology and 24 h service availability. Local priorities were valued higher than national priorities. Ninety-five bids were ranked in order of overall score. The ranked list of development bids provided a useful tool to inform prioritization decisions. CONCLUSIONS: DCEs can offer a theoretically valid and practical means of incorporating the views of the public in an accessible, transparent and streamlined decision-making process when health-care organizations are prioritizing their resources.

AB - BACKGROUND: Health-care organizations need to prioritize their resource use and should incorporate the public's preferences into their priority setting process. METHODS: We apply a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to obtain weights, from the public, for use in a priority setting exercise. Ten attributes were chosen: location of care, public consultation, use of technology, service availability, patient involvement, management of care, evidence of effectiveness, health gain, risk avoidance and priority area. From the DCE responses, weighted benefit scores were calculated and used to rank development bids from across a health-care organization. RESULTS: Sixty-eight members of the public completed the DCE. All attributes except risk avoidance were significant. The most important attribute levels were a large health gain to many people: care being provided in teams, using latest or cutting-edge technology and 24 h service availability. Local priorities were valued higher than national priorities. Ninety-five bids were ranked in order of overall score. The ranked list of development bids provided a useful tool to inform prioritization decisions. CONCLUSIONS: DCEs can offer a theoretically valid and practical means of incorporating the views of the public in an accessible, transparent and streamlined decision-making process when health-care organizations are prioritizing their resources.

KW - economics

KW - health services

KW - metods

U2 - 10.1093/pubmed/fdr102

DO - 10.1093/pubmed/fdr102

M3 - Article

VL - 34

SP - 253

EP - 260

JO - Journal of Public Health

JF - Journal of Public Health

SN - 1741-3842

IS - 2

ER -