Literature DB >> 15272976

Issues arising from the use of qualitative methods in health economics.

Joanna Coast1, Ruth McDonald, Rachel Baker.   

Abstract

As health economists begin to embrace qualitative methodology they inevitably face a number of issues. This paper explores these, distinguishing between those associated with the conflict between quantitative and qualitative methodologies (that has already been faced in a number of other research areas) and those associated with the potential for challenges to the discipline of mainstream economics. The former include both the acceptability of the methods (because of issues such as generalisability and reflexivity) and the acceptability of presentation. The latter appear to be essentially concerned with identity within economics. The paper concludes by noting the positive aspects of conducting qualitative research in health economics: the interesting and motivating nature of the research and, particularly, the possibilities for increasing the relevance associated with economic theory in the context of health and health services.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15272976     DOI: 10.1258/1355819041403286

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Serv Res Policy        ISSN: 1355-8196


  13 in total

Review 1.  Discrete choice experiments of pharmacy services: a systematic review.

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

Review 2.  How far is mixed methods research in the field of health policy and systems in Africa? A scoping review.

Authors:  M De Allegri; I Sieleunou; G A Abiiro; V Ridde
Journal:  Health Policy Plan       Date:  2018-04-01       Impact factor: 3.344

3.  Reporting Formative Qualitative Research to Support the Development of Quantitative Preference Study Protocols and Corresponding Survey Instruments: Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers.

Authors:  Ilene L Hollin; Benjamin M Craig; Joanna Coast; Kathleen Beusterien; Caroline Vass; Rachael DiSantostefano; Holly Peay
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  The role of economic evaluation in the decision-making process of family physicians: design and methods of a qualitative embedded multiple-case study.

Authors:  Chantale Lessard; André-Pierre Contandriopoulos; Marie-Dominique Beaulieu
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2009-02-11       Impact factor: 2.497

Review 5.  The patient perspective of diabetes care: a systematic review of stated preference research.

Authors:  Lill-Brith von Arx; Trine Kjeer
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.883

6.  'Like holding the axe on who should live or not': adolescents' and adults' perceptions of valuing children's health states using a standardised valuation protocol for the EQ-5D-Y-3L.

Authors:  Mimmi Åström; Helen Conte; Jenny Berg; Kristina Burström
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2022-02-24       Impact factor: 3.440

7.  A think aloud study comparing the validity and acceptability of discrete choice and best worst scaling methods.

Authors:  Jennifer A Whitty; Ruth Walker; Xanthe Golenko; Julie Ratcliffe
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-04-23       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  The use of specialty training to retain doctors in Malawi: A discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Kate L Mandeville; Godwin Ulaya; Mylène Lagarde; Adamson S Muula; Titha Dzowela; Kara Hanson
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2016-09-24       Impact factor: 4.634

9.  The greatest happiness of the greatest number? Policy actors' perspectives on the limits of economic evaluation as a tool for informing health care coverage decisions in Thailand.

Authors:  Yot Teerawattananon; Steve Russell
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-09-26       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  An Online Health Prevention Intervention for Youth with Addicted or Mentally Ill Parents: Experiences and Perspectives of Participants and Providers from a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Marla Woolderink; Jill A P M Bindels; Silvia M A A Evers; Aggie T G Paulus; Antoinette D I van Asselt; Onno C P van Schayck
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2015-12-02       Impact factor: 5.428

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.