Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Setting priorities for health interventions in developing countries: A review of empirical studies

  • University Hospital
  • Ministry of Publich Health
  • University of Toronto Joint Centre for Bioethics

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

79 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To assess and summarize empirical studies on priority-setting in developing countries. Methods: Literature review of empirical studies on priority-setting of health interventions in developing countries in Medline and EMBASE (Ovid) databases. Results: Eighteen studies were identified and classified according to their characteristics and methodological approaches. All studies were published after 1999, mostly between 2006 and 2008. Study objectives and methodologies varied considerably. Most studies identified sets of relevant criteria for priority-setting (17/18) and involved different stakeholders as respondents (11/18). Studies used qualitative (8/15) or quantitative (3/15) techniques, or combinations of these (4/15) to elicit preferences from respondents. In a few studies, respondents deliberated on results (3/18). A minority of studies (7/18) resulted in a rank ordering of interventions. Conclusions: This review has revealed an increase in the number of empirical studies on priority-setting in developing countries in the past decade. Methods for explicit priority-setting are developing, being reported and are verifiable and replicable and can potentially lead to solutions for ad hoc policy-making in health care in many developing countries.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)930-939
Number of pages10
JournalTropical Medicine and International Health
Volume14
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2009
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Developing countries
  • Priority-setting

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Setting priorities for health interventions in developing countries: A review of empirical studies'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this