Priority setting using multiple criteria: Should a lung health programme be implemented in Nepal?

R. Baltussen, A. H A Ten Asbroek, X. Koolman, N. Shrestha, P. Bhattarai, Louis Niessen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objectives: To identify and weigh the various criteria for priority setting, and to assess whether a recently evaluated lung health programme in Nepal should be considered a priority in that country. Methods: Through a discrete choice experiment with 66 respondents in Nepal, the relative importance of several criteria for priority setting was determined. Subsequently, a set of interventions, including the lung health programme, was rank ordered on the basis of their overall performance on those criteria. Results: Priority interventions are those that target severe diseases, many beneficiaries and people of middle-age, have large individual health benefits, lead to poverty reduction and are very cost-effective. Certain interventions in tuberculosis control rank highest. The lung health programme ranks 13th out of 34 interventions. Conclusion: This explorative analysis suggests that the lung health programme is among the priorities in Nepal when taking into account a range of relevant criteria for priority setting. The multi-criteria approach can be an important step forward to rational priority setting in developing countries. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)178-185
Number of pages8
JournalHealth Policy and Planning
Volume22
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2007
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Nepal
Lung
Health
health
Tropical Medicine
Insurance Benefits
Poverty
Hygiene
Developing Countries
Tuberculosis
Costs and Cost Analysis
hygiene
contagious disease
developing country
medicine
poverty
Disease
experiment
costs
school

Keywords

  • Multi-criteria decision analysis
  • Nepal
  • Priority setting
  • Rational

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)
  • Health Policy
  • Health(social science)
  • Health Professions(all)
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Priority setting using multiple criteria : Should a lung health programme be implemented in Nepal? / Baltussen, R.; Ten Asbroek, A. H A; Koolman, X.; Shrestha, N.; Bhattarai, P.; Niessen, Louis.

In: Health Policy and Planning, Vol. 22, No. 3, 05.2007, p. 178-185.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Baltussen, R. ; Ten Asbroek, A. H A ; Koolman, X. ; Shrestha, N. ; Bhattarai, P. ; Niessen, Louis. / Priority setting using multiple criteria : Should a lung health programme be implemented in Nepal?. In: Health Policy and Planning. 2007 ; Vol. 22, No. 3. pp. 178-185.
@article{79598bb60c344a4f9115f72c9c202661,
title = "Priority setting using multiple criteria: Should a lung health programme be implemented in Nepal?",
abstract = "Objectives: To identify and weigh the various criteria for priority setting, and to assess whether a recently evaluated lung health programme in Nepal should be considered a priority in that country. Methods: Through a discrete choice experiment with 66 respondents in Nepal, the relative importance of several criteria for priority setting was determined. Subsequently, a set of interventions, including the lung health programme, was rank ordered on the basis of their overall performance on those criteria. Results: Priority interventions are those that target severe diseases, many beneficiaries and people of middle-age, have large individual health benefits, lead to poverty reduction and are very cost-effective. Certain interventions in tuberculosis control rank highest. The lung health programme ranks 13th out of 34 interventions. Conclusion: This explorative analysis suggests that the lung health programme is among the priorities in Nepal when taking into account a range of relevant criteria for priority setting. The multi-criteria approach can be an important step forward to rational priority setting in developing countries. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine",
keywords = "Multi-criteria decision analysis, Nepal, Priority setting, Rational",
author = "R. Baltussen and {Ten Asbroek}, {A. H A} and X. Koolman and N. Shrestha and P. Bhattarai and Louis Niessen",
year = "2007",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1093/heapol/czm010",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "178--185",
journal = "Health Policy and Planning",
issn = "0268-1080",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Priority setting using multiple criteria

T2 - Should a lung health programme be implemented in Nepal?

AU - Baltussen, R.

AU - Ten Asbroek, A. H A

AU - Koolman, X.

AU - Shrestha, N.

AU - Bhattarai, P.

AU - Niessen, Louis

PY - 2007/5

Y1 - 2007/5

N2 - Objectives: To identify and weigh the various criteria for priority setting, and to assess whether a recently evaluated lung health programme in Nepal should be considered a priority in that country. Methods: Through a discrete choice experiment with 66 respondents in Nepal, the relative importance of several criteria for priority setting was determined. Subsequently, a set of interventions, including the lung health programme, was rank ordered on the basis of their overall performance on those criteria. Results: Priority interventions are those that target severe diseases, many beneficiaries and people of middle-age, have large individual health benefits, lead to poverty reduction and are very cost-effective. Certain interventions in tuberculosis control rank highest. The lung health programme ranks 13th out of 34 interventions. Conclusion: This explorative analysis suggests that the lung health programme is among the priorities in Nepal when taking into account a range of relevant criteria for priority setting. The multi-criteria approach can be an important step forward to rational priority setting in developing countries. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine

AB - Objectives: To identify and weigh the various criteria for priority setting, and to assess whether a recently evaluated lung health programme in Nepal should be considered a priority in that country. Methods: Through a discrete choice experiment with 66 respondents in Nepal, the relative importance of several criteria for priority setting was determined. Subsequently, a set of interventions, including the lung health programme, was rank ordered on the basis of their overall performance on those criteria. Results: Priority interventions are those that target severe diseases, many beneficiaries and people of middle-age, have large individual health benefits, lead to poverty reduction and are very cost-effective. Certain interventions in tuberculosis control rank highest. The lung health programme ranks 13th out of 34 interventions. Conclusion: This explorative analysis suggests that the lung health programme is among the priorities in Nepal when taking into account a range of relevant criteria for priority setting. The multi-criteria approach can be an important step forward to rational priority setting in developing countries. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine

KW - Multi-criteria decision analysis

KW - Nepal

KW - Priority setting

KW - Rational

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34548452420&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34548452420&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/heapol/czm010

DO - 10.1093/heapol/czm010

M3 - Article

C2 - 17412742

AN - SCOPUS:34548452420

VL - 22

SP - 178

EP - 185

JO - Health Policy and Planning

JF - Health Policy and Planning

SN - 0268-1080

IS - 3

ER -