Literature DB >> 12113438

'The public is too subjective': public involvement at different levels of health-care decision making.

Andrea Litva1, Joanna Coast, Jenny Donovan, John Eyles, Michael Shepherd, Jo Tacchi, Julia Abelson, Kieran Morgan.   

Abstract

There are a number of impulses towards public participation in health care decision making including instrumentalist, communitarian, educative and expressive impulses and the desire for increased accountability. There has, however, been little research looking systematically at the public's preferences for being involved in particular types of rationing decisions, nor indeed, has there been a critical examination of the degree of involvement desired by the public. The research reported here uses findings from focus groups and in-depth interviews to explore these questions. Eight focus groups were conducted with a total of 57 informants, four amongst randomly selected members of the public and four with informants from health and non-health related organisations. Nineteen interviews were conducted to allow the elaboration of focus group comments, to probe views more deeply and to pursue emerging themes. The findings show variations in the willingness of members of the public to be involved in health care decisions and consistency across the different forms of the public as represented by the focus groups with randomly selected citizens and pre-existing organisations. There was a strong desire in all the groups for the public to be involved both at the system and programme levels, with much less willingness to be involved at the individual level. At the system and programme levels informants generally favoured consultation, without responsibility for decisions, but with the guarantee that their contribution would be heard and that decisions taken following consultation would be explained. At the patient level informants felt that the public should participate only by setting criteria for deciding between potential beneficiaries of treatment. The public has much to contribute, particularly at the system and programme levels, to supplement the inputs of health care professionals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12113438     DOI: 10.1016/s0277-9536(01)00151-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  54 in total

Review 1.  The ethics of public consultation in health care: an Orthodox Jewish perspective.

Authors:  Stephen Buetow
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2003-06

2.  Are elected health boards an effective mechanism for public participation in health service governance?

Authors:  Robin Gauld
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Public views on priority setting for high cost medications in public hospitals in Australia.

Authors:  Gisselle Gallego; Susan J Taylor; Paul McNeill; Jo-anne E Brien
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 3.377

4.  Community involvement in developing policies for genetic testing: assessing the interests and experiences of individuals affected by genetic conditions.

Authors:  Sarah E Gollust; Kira Apse; Barbara P Fuller; Paul Steven Miller; Barbara B Biesecker
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  Development of a support tool for complex decision-making in the provision of rural maternity care.

Authors:  Glen Hearns; Michael C Klein; William Trousdale; Catherine Ulrich; David Butcher; Christiana Miewald; Ronald Lindstrom; Sahba Eftekhary; Jessica Rosinski; Oralia Gómez-Ramírez; Andrea Procyk
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2010-02

6.  'Taking off the suit': engaging the community in primary health care decision-making.

Authors:  Elizabeth Anderson; Michael Shepherd; Chris Salisbury
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Lessons from local engagement in Latin American health systems.

Authors:  Geoffrey D Meads; Frances E Griffiths; Sarah D Goode; Michiyo Iwami
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  Lay perceptions of the desired role and type of user involvement in clinical governance.

Authors:  Andrea Litva; Krysia Canvin; Michael Shepherd; Ann Jacoby; Mark Gabbay
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.377

9.  Patients as research partners; how to value their perceptions, contribution and labor?

Authors:  Elise Smith; Jean-Chrisophe Bélisle-Pipon; David Resnik
Journal:  Citiz Sci       Date:  2019-03-08

10.  Engaging the public in priority-setting for health technology assessment: findings from a citizens' jury.

Authors:  Devidas Menon; Tania Stafinski
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 3.377

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.