Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2000 Nov 25;321(7272):1316-8.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.321.7272.1316.

Priority setting for new technologies in medicine: qualitative case study

P A Singer  1 , D K Martin, M Giacomini, L Purdy
Affiliations

Priority setting for new technologies in medicine: qualitative case study

P A Singer et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objective: To describe priority setting for new technologies in medicine.

Design: Qualitative study using case studies and grounded theory.

Setting: Two committees advising on priorities for new technologies in cancer and cardiac care in Ontario, Canada.

Participants: The two committees and their 26 members.

Main outcome measures: Accounts of priority setting decision making gathered by reviewing documents, interviewing members, and observing meetings.

Results: Six interrelated domains were identified for priority setting for new technologies in medicine: the institutions in which the decision are made, the people who make the decisions, the factors they consider, the reasons for the decisions, the process of decision making, and the appeals mechanism for challenging the decisions.

Conclusion: These domains constitute a model of priority setting for new technologies in medicine. The next step will be to harmonise this description of how priority setting decisions are made with ethical accounts of how they should be made.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Accountability for reasonableness.
    Daniels N. Daniels N. BMJ. 2000 Nov 25;321(7272):1300-1. doi: 10.1136/bmj.321.7272.1300. BMJ. 2000. PMID: 11090498 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

References

    1. Daniels N, Sabin JE. Limits to health care: fair procedures, democratic deliberation and the legitimacy problem for insurers. Philosophy and Public Affairs. 1997;26:303–350. - PubMed
    1. Singer PA. Resource allocation: beyond evidence-based medicine and cost-effectiveness analysis. ACP Journal Club. 1997;127:A16–A18. - PubMed
    1. Martin DK, Singer PA. Priority setting and health technology assessment: beyond evidence based medicine and cost effectiveness analysis. In: Ham C, Coulter A, eds. Priorities in health care. Buckingham: Open University Press (in press).
    1. Newhouse JP. Medical care costs: how much welfare loss? Journal of Economic Perspectives. 1992;6(3):3–21. - PubMed
    1. Yin RK. Case Study research: design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1994. p. 13.

Publication types

MeSH terms