MCDA在国家健康和护理卓越研究所的公共卫生建议中发挥的作用

IF 1.5 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Operations Research for Health Care Pub Date : 2019-12-01 DOI:10.1016/j.orhc.2019.02.001
Brian P. Reddy , Stephen J. Walters , Alejandra Duenas , Praveen Thokala , Michael P. Kelly
{"title":"MCDA在国家健康和护理卓越研究所的公共卫生建议中发挥的作用","authors":"Brian P. Reddy ,&nbsp;Stephen J. Walters ,&nbsp;Alejandra Duenas ,&nbsp;Praveen Thokala ,&nbsp;Michael P. Kelly","doi":"10.1016/j.orhc.2019.02.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span><span>Recommendations made by the UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) consider a range of relevant factors. Most famously, this includes interventions’ incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Given the ICER’s primacy in such decision-making, it is sometimes assumed as almost analogous to an optimisation problem, maximising the number of Quality Adjusted Life Years generated by the </span>health system subject to costs. However, structured OR techniques could still prove beneficial in informing the broader decision-making problem. Decisions are currently arrived at by advisory committees through a combination of structured processes and relatively unstructured deliberations. In principle, decision makers are expected to consider dozens of relevant factors after the completion of the economic modelling stage. No model is currently used to combine these, and MCDA may be suitable to better structure and aid these discussions and to highlight the opportunity costs associated with them. This paper outlines some of the factors currently considered in </span>public health<span> settings, proposes a number of approaches as to how MCDA-inspired techniques could be grafted onto current NICE processes incrementally, and considers the appropriateness of their use in this setting given NICE’s role in the health system. The paper focuses on the formulation of NICE’s public health guidance, as this area has a specific focus on equity and the determinants of health, and is therefore has the most obvious need to balance ICERs and other factors.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":46320,"journal":{"name":"Operations Research for Health Care","volume":"23 ","pages":"Article 100179"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.orhc.2019.02.001","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A role for MCDA to navigate the trade-offs in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s public health recommendations\",\"authors\":\"Brian P. Reddy ,&nbsp;Stephen J. Walters ,&nbsp;Alejandra Duenas ,&nbsp;Praveen Thokala ,&nbsp;Michael P. Kelly\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.orhc.2019.02.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span><span>Recommendations made by the UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) consider a range of relevant factors. Most famously, this includes interventions’ incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Given the ICER’s primacy in such decision-making, it is sometimes assumed as almost analogous to an optimisation problem, maximising the number of Quality Adjusted Life Years generated by the </span>health system subject to costs. However, structured OR techniques could still prove beneficial in informing the broader decision-making problem. Decisions are currently arrived at by advisory committees through a combination of structured processes and relatively unstructured deliberations. In principle, decision makers are expected to consider dozens of relevant factors after the completion of the economic modelling stage. No model is currently used to combine these, and MCDA may be suitable to better structure and aid these discussions and to highlight the opportunity costs associated with them. This paper outlines some of the factors currently considered in </span>public health<span> settings, proposes a number of approaches as to how MCDA-inspired techniques could be grafted onto current NICE processes incrementally, and considers the appropriateness of their use in this setting given NICE’s role in the health system. The paper focuses on the formulation of NICE’s public health guidance, as this area has a specific focus on equity and the determinants of health, and is therefore has the most obvious need to balance ICERs and other factors.</span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46320,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Operations Research for Health Care\",\"volume\":\"23 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100179\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.orhc.2019.02.001\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Operations Research for Health Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211692317301674\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Operations Research for Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211692317301674","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

英国国家健康与护理卓越研究所(NICE)提出的建议考虑了一系列相关因素。最著名的是,这包括干预措施的增量成本效益比(ICER)。鉴于ICER在此类决策中的首要地位,它有时被认为几乎类似于优化问题,即在成本约束下最大化卫生系统产生的质量调整生命年的数量。然而,结构化OR技术仍然可以证明在通知更广泛的决策问题方面是有益的。目前,咨询委员会通过结构化程序和相对非结构化的审议相结合的方式作出决定。原则上,在完成经济建模阶段后,决策者应该考虑几十个相关因素。目前还没有模型用于将这些结合起来,MCDA可能适合于更好地组织和帮助这些讨论,并突出与之相关的机会成本。本文概述了目前在公共卫生环境中考虑的一些因素,提出了一些方法,如何将mcda启发的技术逐步嫁接到目前的NICE过程中,并考虑到NICE在卫生系统中的作用,在这种环境中使用它们的适当性。本文的重点是制定NICE的公共卫生指南,因为这一领域特别关注公平和健康的决定因素,因此最明显需要平衡ICERs和其他因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A role for MCDA to navigate the trade-offs in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s public health recommendations

Recommendations made by the UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) consider a range of relevant factors. Most famously, this includes interventions’ incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Given the ICER’s primacy in such decision-making, it is sometimes assumed as almost analogous to an optimisation problem, maximising the number of Quality Adjusted Life Years generated by the health system subject to costs. However, structured OR techniques could still prove beneficial in informing the broader decision-making problem. Decisions are currently arrived at by advisory committees through a combination of structured processes and relatively unstructured deliberations. In principle, decision makers are expected to consider dozens of relevant factors after the completion of the economic modelling stage. No model is currently used to combine these, and MCDA may be suitable to better structure and aid these discussions and to highlight the opportunity costs associated with them. This paper outlines some of the factors currently considered in public health settings, proposes a number of approaches as to how MCDA-inspired techniques could be grafted onto current NICE processes incrementally, and considers the appropriateness of their use in this setting given NICE’s role in the health system. The paper focuses on the formulation of NICE’s public health guidance, as this area has a specific focus on equity and the determinants of health, and is therefore has the most obvious need to balance ICERs and other factors.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Operations Research for Health Care
Operations Research for Health Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
69 days
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Preference-based allocation of patients to nursing homes Balancing continuity of care and home care schedule costs using blueprint routes Outpatient appointment systems: A new heuristic with patient classification A modeling framework for evaluating proactive and reactive nurse rostering strategies — A case study from a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1