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
. 2004 Sep 8;4(1):25.
doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-4-25.

Setting priorities in health care organizations: criteria, processes, and parameters of success

Affiliations

Setting priorities in health care organizations: criteria, processes, and parameters of success

Jennifer L Gibson et al. BMC Health Serv Res. .

Abstract

Background: Hospitals and regional health authorities must set priorities in the face of resource constraints. Decision-makers seek practical ways to set priorities fairly in strategic planning, but find limited guidance from the literature. Very little has been reported from the perspective of Board members and senior managers about what criteria, processes and parameters of success they would use to set priorities fairly.

Discussion: We facilitated workshops for board members and senior leadership at three health care organizations to assist them in developing a strategy for fair priority setting. Workshop participants identified 8 priority setting criteria, 10 key priority setting process elements, and 6 parameters of success that they would use to set priorities in their organizations. Decision-makers in other organizations can draw lessons from these findings to enhance the fairness of their priority setting decision-making.

Summary: Lessons learned in three workshops fill an important gap in the literature about what criteria, processes, and parameters of success Board members and senior managers would use to set priorities fairly.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Mitton CR, Donaldson C. Setting priorities and allocating resources in health regions: lessons from a project evaluating program budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA) Health Policy. 2003;64:335–348. doi: 10.1016/S0168-8510(02)00198-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kapiriri L, Norheim OF, Heggenhougen K. Using burden of disease information for health planning in developing countries: the experience from Uganda. Social Science & Medicine. 2003;56:2433–2441. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00246-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. PausJenssen A, Singer PA, Detsky AS. How Ontario's formulary committee makes recommendations. Pharmacoeconomics. 2003;21:285–294. - PubMed
    1. Ham C, McIver S. Contested decisions: priority setting in the NHS. London: King's Fund Publishing; 2000.
    1. Foy R, So J, Rous E, Scarffe JH. Perspectives of commissioners and cancer specialists in prioritizing new cancer drugs: impact of the evidence threshold. BMJ. 1999;318:456–459. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources