IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does deliberation make a difference? Results from a citizens panel study of health goals priority setting


  • Abelson, Julia
  • Eyles, John
  • McLeod, Christopher B.
  • Collins, Patricia
  • McMullan, Colin
  • Forest, Pierre-Gerlier


No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Abelson, Julia & Eyles, John & McLeod, Christopher B. & Collins, Patricia & McMullan, Colin & Forest, Pierre-Gerlier, 2003. "Does deliberation make a difference? Results from a citizens panel study of health goals priority setting," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 95-106, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:66:y:2003:i:1:p:95-106

    Download full text from publisher

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

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Bowling, Ann & Jacobson, Bobbie & Southgate, Lesley, 1993. "Explorations in consultation of the public and health professionals on priority setting in an inner London health district," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 851-857, October.
    2. Judith Petts, 2001. "Evaluating the Effectiveness of Deliberative Processes: Waste Management Case-studies," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(2), pages 207-226.
    3. Lenaghan, Jo, 1999. "Involving the public in rationing decisions. The experience of citizens juries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1-2), pages 45-61, September.
    4. Cookson, Richard & Dolan, Paul, 1999. "Public views on health care rationing: a group discussion study," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1-2), pages 63-74, September.
    5. Thomas C. Beierle, 1999. "Using Social Goals To Evaluate Public Participation In Environmental Decisions," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 16(3-4), pages 75-103, September.
    6. Eyles, John & Brimacombe, Michael & Chaulk, Paul & Stoddart, Greg & Pranger, Tina & Moase, Olive, 2001. "What determines health? To where should we shift resources? : Attitudes towards the determinants of health among multiple stakeholder groups in Prince Edward Island, Canada," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 53(12), pages 1611-1619, December.
    7. Lyn Kathlene & John A. Martin, 1991. "Enhancing citizen participation: Panel designs, perspectives, and policy formation," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(1), pages 46-63.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Elberse, Janneke Elisabeth & Pittens, Carina Anna Cornelia Maria & de Cock Buning, Tjard & Broerse, Jacqueline Elisabeth Willy, 2012. "Patient involvement in a scientific advisory process: Setting the research agenda for medical products," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 231-242.
    2. Carman, Kristin L. & Mallery, Coretta & Maurer, Maureen & Wang, Grace & Garfinkel, Steve & Yang, Manshu & Gilmore, Dierdre & Windham, Amy & Ginsburg, Marjorie & Sofaer, Shoshanna & Gold, Marthe & Path, 2015. "Effectiveness of public deliberation methods for gathering input on issues in healthcare: Results from a randomized trial," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 11-20.
    3. Abelson, Julia & Forest, Pierre-Gerlier & Eyles, John & Casebeer, Ann & Martin, Elisabeth & Mackean, Gail, 2007. "Examining the role of context in the implementation of a deliberative public participation experiment: Results from a Canadian comparative study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(10), pages 2115-2128, May.
    4. Laura J. Damschroder & Peter A. Ubel & Jason Riis & Dylan M. Smith, 2007. "An alternative approach for eliciting willingness-to-pay: A randomized Internet trial," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 2, pages 96-106, April.
    5. Abelson, Julia & Giacomini, Mita & Lehoux, Pascale & Gauvin, Francois-Pierre, 2007. "Bringing `the public' into health technology assessment and coverage policy decisions: From principles to practice," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 37-50, June.
    6. Scutchfield, F. Douglas & Hall, Laura & Ireson, Carol L., 2006. "The public and public health organizations: Issues for community engagement in public health," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 76-85, June.
    7. Madi, Banyana Cecilia & Hussein, Julia & Hounton, Sennen & D'Ambruoso, Lucia & Achadi, Endang & Arhinful, Daniel Kojo, 2007. "Setting priorities for safe motherhood programme evaluation: A participatory process in three developing countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 94-104, September.
    8. Uttjek, Margaretha & DufÄker, Mona & Stenberg, Berndt & Nygren, Lennart, 2008. "Priority dilemmas in psoriasis care and visions of a future care in a group of administrators, politicians and professionals in northern Sweden," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 203-216, August.
    9. Timotijevic, Lada & Raats, Monique Maria, 2007. "Evaluation of two methods of deliberative participation of older people in food-policy development," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 302-319, August.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:66:y:2003:i:1:p:95-106. 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 (). General contact details of provider: .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.