Literature DB >> 10398527

The appropriate uses of qualitative methods in health economics.

J Coast1.   

Abstract

Ontology, epistemology and methodology are not subjects frequently discussed in health economics, yet they are of great relevance to the question of how, or whether, to use qualitative methods as a means of examining certain issues. The paper discusses the nature of enquiry in health economics and then details the nature of qualitative methods and the constructivist philosophy with which they are most commonly associated. The paper continues by examining different areas in the study of economics: neo-classical positive economics, alternative approaches to explanatory economics and normative welfare economics. For each area the philosophical approach is outlined as are the areas of research interest. Appropriate roles for qualitative methods within these philosophical approaches are then suggested. The paper concludes by warning that health economists should not use qualitative methods naively. They must be aware of the potential difficulties: both of inadvertently ending up outside the intended research philosophy and of conducting research which is accepted by neither economists nor qualitative researchers. If, however, health economists are aware of ontological, epistemological and methodological issues, they can make an informed decision about the appropriateness of qualitative methods in their research and thereby potentially enhance their ability to answer the questions in which they are interested. Copyright 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10398527     DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1050(199906)8:4<345::aid-hec432>3.0.co;2-q

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Econ        ISSN: 1057-9230            Impact factor:   3.046


  23 in total

1.  The impact of health economics on healthcare delivery. A primary care perspective.

Authors:  D P Kernick
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  Discrete choice experiments of pharmacy services: a systematic review.

Authors:  Caroline Vass; Ewan Gray; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharm       Date:  2016-06

3.  Using conjoint analysis to model the preferences of different patient segments for attributes of patient-centered care.

Authors:  Charles E Cunningham; Ken Deal; Heather Rimas; Heather Campbell; Ann Russell; Jennifer Henderson; Anne Matheson; Blake Melnick
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2008-12-01       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  Can urban methadone patients complete health utility assessments?

Authors:  Paul A Teixeira; Bruce R Schackman
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2008-03-07

5.  Modeling the bullying prevention program preferences of educators: a discrete choice conjoint experiment.

Authors:  Charles E Cunningham; Tracy Vaillancourt; Heather Rimas; Ken Deal; Lesley Cunningham; Kathy Short; Yvonne Chen
Journal:  J Abnorm Child Psychol       Date:  2009-10

6.  The interim service preferences of parents waiting for children's mental health treatment: a discrete choice conjoint experiment.

Authors:  Charles E Cunningham; Yvonne Chen; Ken Deal; Heather Rimas; Patrick McGrath; Graham Reid; Ellen Lipman; Penny Corkum
Journal:  J Abnorm Child Psychol       Date:  2013-08

7.  How Qualitative Methods Can be Used to Inform Model Development.

Authors:  Samantha Husbands; Susan Jowett; Pelham Barton; Joanna Coast
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Global Health Initiatives and aid effectiveness: insights from a Ugandan case study.

Authors:  Valeria Oliveira Cruz; Barbara McPake
Journal:  Global Health       Date:  2011-07-04       Impact factor: 4.185

9.  Providing information to parents of children with mental health problems: a discrete choice conjoint analysis of professional preferences.

Authors:  Charles E Cunningham; Ken Deal; Heather Rimas; Yvonne Chen; Don H Buchanan; Kathie Sdao-Jarvie
Journal:  J Abnorm Child Psychol       Date:  2009-11

10.  Modeling organizational justice improvements in a pediatric health service : a discrete-choice conjoint experiment.

Authors:  Charles E Cunningham; Linda Kostrzewa; Heather Rimas; Yvonne Chen; Ken Deal; Susan Blatz; Alida Bowman; Don H Buchanan; Randy Calvert; Barbara Jennings
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 3.883

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.