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
. 2012 Jul 18;10(1):9.
doi: 10.1186/1478-7547-10-9.

From efficacy to equity: Literature review of decision criteria for resource allocation and healthcare decisionmaking

Affiliations

From efficacy to equity: Literature review of decision criteria for resource allocation and healthcare decisionmaking

Lalla Aïda Guindo et al. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. .

Abstract

Objectives: Resource allocation is a challenging issue faced by health policy decisionmakers requiring careful consideration of many factors. Objectives of this study were to identify decision criteria and their frequency reported in the literature on healthcare decisionmaking.

Method: An extensive literature search was performed in Medline and EMBASE to identify articles reporting healthcare decision criteria. Studies conducted with decisionmakers (e.g., focus groups, surveys, interviews), conceptual and review articles and articles describing multicriteria tools were included. Criteria were extracted, organized using a classification system derived from the EVIDEM framework and applying multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) principles, and the frequency of their occurrence was measured.

Results: Out of 3146 records identified, 2790 were excluded. Out of 356 articles assessed for eligibility, 40 studies included. Criteria were identified from studies performed in several regions of the world involving decisionmakers at micro, meso and macro levels of decision and from studies reporting on multicriteria tools. Large variations in terminology used to define criteria were observed and 360 different terms were identified. These were assigned to 58 criteria which were classified in 9 different categories including: health outcomes; types of benefit; disease impact; therapeutic context; economic impact; quality of evidence; implementation complexity; priority, fairness and ethics; and overall context. The most frequently mentioned criteria were: equity/fairness (32 times), efficacy/effectiveness (29), stakeholder interests and pressures (28), cost-effectiveness (23), strength of evidence (20), safety (19), mission and mandate of health system (19), organizational requirements and capacity (17), patient-reported outcomes (17) and need (16).

Conclusion: This study highlights the importance of considering both normative and feasibility criteria for fair allocation of resources and optimized decisionmaking for coverage and use of healthcare interventions. This analysis provides a foundation to develop a questionnaire for an international survey of decisionmakers on criteria and their relative importance. The ultimate objective is to develop sound multicriteria approaches to enlighten healthcare decisionmaking and priority-setting.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Categorization of terms reported in the literature.
Figure 2
Figure 2
PRISMA diagram.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Classification system and number of citations for each criterion.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Number of citations for each category of criteria of the classification system.

References

    1. Hsu M, Anen C, Quartz SR. The right and the good: distributive justice and neural encoding of equity and efficiency. Science. 2008;320:1092–1095. doi: 10.1126/science.1153651. - DOI - PubMed
    1. World Health Organization. Guidance on ethics and equitable access to HIV treatment and care. http://www.who.int/ethics/Guidance%20on%20Ethics%20and%20HIV.pdf.
    1. Daniels N. Justice, health, and healthcare. Am J Bioeth. 2001;1:2–16. - PubMed
    1. Gruskin S, Daniels N. Process is the point: justice and human rights: priority setting and fair deliberative process. Am J Public Health. 2008;98:1573–1577. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2007.123182. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Persad G, Wertheimer A, Emanuel EJ. Principles for allocation of scarce medical interventions. Lancet. 2009;373:423–431. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60137-9. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources