Advancement in research synthesis, so well articulated and advocated by Lomas (2005) and Lavis et al. (2005), is a necessary but not sufficient development for the systematized use of research in managerial practice. Although significant progress in the use of evidence-based approaches can be witnessed, enriching efforts need to progress within both the management and research communities. Contextualized by direct experience with harm reduction approaches to population health improvement, this commentary offers propositions concerning the nature of the researcher/decision-maker interchange, arguing for a pronounced strengthening of involvement and activity at all levels in the service delivery system.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2585335 | PMC |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
A Multi-dimensional Framework of Valued Output for Primary Care in England.
Appl Health Econ Health Policy
September 2024
Office of Health Economics, London, UK.
Improving efficiency and productivity are key aspects to ensure that general practices in England can meet the needs of a growing population with increasingly demanding and costly healthcare needs. However, current evidence on the efficiency and productivity of general practices is weak, partly due to suboptimal approaches to measure their 'valued' output. To overcome this limitation, this paper presents a multi-dimensional framework and indicators of valued output from the healthcare decision-maker's perspective.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAdvance Medical Decision-Making Differs Across First- and Third-Person Perspectives.
AJOB Empir Bioeth
October 2024
Uehiro Center for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Background: Advance healthcare decision-making presumes that a prior treatment preference expressed with sufficient mental capacity ("T1 preference") should trump a contrary preference expressed after significant cognitive decline ("T2 preference"). This assumption is much debated in normative bioethics, but little is known about lay judgments in this domain. This study investigated participants' judgments about which preference should be followed, and whether these judgments differed depending on a first-person (deciding for one's future self) versus third-person (deciding for a friend or stranger) perspective.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFThe uncertainty related to the inexactitude of prioritization based on consistent pairwise comparisons.
PLoS One
September 2023
Faculty of Economics and Management, Opole University of Technology, Opole, Poland.
When the in/consistency in Pairwise Comparisons (PCs) is taken into consideration as the subarea of the Multi Attribute Decision Making (MADM) scientific field, it has many repercussions in various types of research areas including different modelling scenarios e.g. reduction of inconsistency during PCs, deriving appropriate consistency thresholds for inconsistent Pairwise Comparison Matrices (PCMs), completing of incomplete PCMs, aggregating of individual PCMs in relation to Group Decision Making (GDM) aspects, and PCMs in/consistency relation to credibility of Priority Vectors (PV) derived from PCMs with the application of various Priorities Deriving Methods (PDMs).
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEconomic evaluation of self-help group interventions for health in LMICs: a scoping review.
Health Policy Plan
October 2023
Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom.
Article Synopsis
- * A systematic search identified nine relevant studies, mostly using randomized controlled trials to analyze costs and effects; however, many studies failed to specify the decision-making context or target decision makers effectively.
- * The review highlights limitations in the ability of existing studies to guide funders in understanding the full value of self-help group interventions, suggesting that a cross-sectoral approach to presenting evidence could enhance decision-making.
Recognizing the Broader Value of Meningococcal Vaccination: A Matter of Evidence, Ability, or Willingness?
Value Health
October 2023
Office of Health Economics, London, England, UK.
Objectives: It is widely argued that the value of meningococcal vaccination extends beyond the narrow value elements traditionally considered in health technology assessment. Nevertheless, measuring broader value presents challenges, whereas assessment methods and outcomes vary widely. This article investigates the extent to which the broader value of meningococcal vaccination is recognized, considering the available evidence and decision maker's methodological ability and willingness.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWant AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!