IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v51y2000i6p859-869.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The evidence-based approach in health policy and health care delivery

Author

Listed:
  • Niessen, Louis W.
  • Grijseels, Els W. M.
  • Rutten, Frans F. H.

Abstract

Evidence-based approaches are prominent on the national and international agendas for health policy and health research. It is unclear what the implications of this approach are for the production and distribution of health in populations, given the notion of multiple determinants in health. It is equally unclear what kind of barriers there are to the adoption of evidence-based approaches in health care practice. This paper sketches some developments in the way in which health policy is informed by the results from health research. It summarises evidence-based approaches in health at three impact levels: intersectoral assessment, national health care policy, and evidence-based medicine in everyday practice. Consensus is growing on the role of broad and specific health determinants, including health care, as well as on priority setting based on the burden of diseases. In spite of methodological constraints, there is a demand for intersectoral assessments, especially in health sector reform. Initiators of policy changes in other sectors may be held responsible for providing the evidence related to health. There are limited possibilities for priority setting at the national health care policy level. Hence, there is a decentralisation of responsibilities for resource use. Health care providers are encouraged to assume agency roles for both patients and society and asked to promote and deliver effective and efficient health care. Governments will have to design a national framework to facilitate their organisation and legal framework to enhance evidence-based health policy. Treatment guidelines supported by evidence on effectiveness and efficiency will be one essential element in this process. With the increasing number of advocates for the enhancement of population health in the policy arenas, evidence-based approaches provide the information and some of the tools to help with priority setting.

Suggested Citation

  • Niessen, Louis W. & Grijseels, Els W. M. & Rutten, Frans F. H., 2000. "The evidence-based approach in health policy and health care delivery," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 51(6), pages 859-869, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:51:y:2000:i:6:p:859-869
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(00)00066-6
    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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas Gries & Dirk Langeleh, 2004. "Anreizkompatibilität als zentrales Element eines neu gestalteten Gesundheitsmarktes," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 5(3), pages 293-311, August.
    2. Ferlie, Ewan & Crilly, Tessa & Jashapara, Ashok & Peckham, Anna, 2012. "Knowledge mobilisation in healthcare: A critical review of health sector and generic management literature," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(8), pages 1297-1304.
    3. Frans Rutten & Werner Brouwer & Louis Niessen, 2005. "Practice guidelines based on clinical and economic evidence," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 6(2), pages 91-93, June.
    4. Lambert, Helen, 2006. "Accounting for EBM: Notions of evidence in medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(11), pages 2633-2645, June.
    5. Blume, Stuart & Tump, Janneke, 2010. "Evidence and policymaking: The introduction of MMR vaccine in the Netherlands," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(6), pages 1049-1055, September.
    6. Gross, Revital, 2004. "A consumer-based tool for evaluating the quality of health services in the Israeli health care system following reform," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 143-158, May.
    7. Lindič, Jaka & Bavdaž, Mojca & Kovačič, Helena, 2012. "Higher growth through the Blue Ocean Strategy: Implications for economic policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 928-938.
    8. Gordon, Elisa Jill, 2006. "The political contexts of evidence-based medicine: Policymaking for daily hemodialysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(11), pages 2707-2719, June.
    9. Sogoric, Selma & Dzakula, Aleksandar & Rukavina, Tea Vukusic & Grozic-Zivolic, Sonja & Lazaric-Zec, Danijela & Dzono-Boban, Ankica & Brborovic, Ognjen & Lang, Slobodan & Vuletic, Silvije, 2009. "Evaluation of Croatian model of polycentric health planning and decision making," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(3), pages 271-278, March.
    10. Velasco Garrido, Marcial & Gerhardus, Ansgar & Røttingen, John-Arne & Busse, Reinhard, 2010. "Developing Health Technology Assessment to address health care system needs," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 196-202, March.
    11. Gagnon, France & Turgeon, Jean & Dallaire, Clemence, 2007. "Healthy public policy: A conceptual cognitive framework," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 42-55, April.
    12. Mossialos, Elias & Naci, Huseyin & Courtin, Emilie, 2013. "Expanding the role of community pharmacists: Policymaking in the absence of policy-relevant evidence?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 135-148.
    13. de Bont, Antoinette & Zandwijken, Gladys & Stolk, Elly & Niessen, Louis, 2007. "Prioritisation by physicians in the Netherlands--The growth hormone example in drug reimbursement decisions," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 369-377, March.
    14. Amy Weimann & Maylene Shung-King & Nicole McCreedy & Lambed Tatah & Clarisse Mapa-Tassou & Trish Muzenda & Ishtar Govia & Vincent Were & Tolu Oni, 2021. "Intersectoral Action for Addressing NCDs through the Food Environment: An Analysis of NCD Framing in Global Policies and Its Relevance for the African Context," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-17, October.
    15. Lars K. Hallstrom & Glen T. Hvenegaard, 2021. "Fostering Evidence-Informed Decision-Making for Protected Areas through the Alberta Parks Social Science Working Group," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-15, February.
    16. Xiu-xia, Li & Ya, Zheng & Yao-long, Chen & Ke-hu, Yang & Zong-jiu, Zhang, 2015. "The reporting characteristics and methodological quality of Cochrane reviews about health policy research," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(4), pages 503-510.
    17. Kapiriri, Lydia & Norheim, Ole F. & Martin, Douglas K., 2009. "Fairness and accountability for reasonableness. Do the views of priority setting decision makers differ across health systems and levels of decision making?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 766-773, February.
    18. Chris Sampson & Bernarda Zamora & Sam Watson & John Cairns & Kalipso Chalkidou & Patricia Cubi-Molla & Nancy Devlin & Borja García-Lorenzo & Dyfrig A. Hughes & Ashley A. Leech & Adrian Towse, 2022. "Supply-Side Cost-Effectiveness Thresholds: Questions for Evidence-Based Policy," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 20(5), pages 651-667, September.
    19. Robinson, Suzanne & Williams, Iestyn & Dickinson, Helen & Freeman, Tim & Rumbold, Benedict, 2012. "Priority-setting and rationing in healthcare: Evidence from the English experience," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(12), pages 2386-2393.

    Corrections

    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:socmed:v:51:y:2000:i:6:p:859-869. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.