IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Resolving the challenges in the international comparison of health systems: The must do's and the trade-offs

Listed author(s):
  • Forde, Ian
  • Morgan, David
  • Klazinga, Niek S.
Registered author(s):

    Countries are increasingly publishing health system performance statistics alongside those of their peers, to identify high performers and achieve a continuously improving health system. The aim of the paper is to identify, and discuss resolution of, some key methodological challenges, which arise when comparing health system performance. To illustrate the issues, we focus on two OECD flagship initiatives: the System of Health Accounts (SHA) and the Health Care Quality Indicators (HCQI) project and refer to two main actors: a coordinating agency, which proposes and collates performance data and second, data correspondents in constituent health systems, who submit data to the coordinating centre. Discussion is structured around two themes: a set of must-do's (legitimacy of the coordinating centre, validity of proposed indicators, feasibility of data collection and technical support for data correspondents) and a set of trade-offs (depth vs. breadth in the number of system elements compared, aggregation vs. granularity of data, flexibility vs. consistency of indicator definitions and inclusion criteria). Robust fulfillment of the must-do's and transparent resolution of the trade-offs both depend upon effective collaboration between the coordinating centre and data correspondents, and a close working relationship between a technical secretariat and a body of experts.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Health Policy.

    Volume (Year): 112 (2013)
    Issue (Month): 1 ()
    Pages: 4-8

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:112:y:2013:i:1:p:4-8
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.01.018
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:112:y:2013:i:1:p:4-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    or ()

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.