IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01928064.html

From representing views to representativeness of views: Illustrating a new (Q2S) approach in the context of health care priority setting in nine European countries

Author

Listed:
  • Cam Donaldson

    (Yunus Centre - GCU - Glasgow Caledonian University)

  • Rachel Baker
  • Helen Mason
  • Mark Pennington

    (LSHTM - London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine)

  • Sue Bell
  • Michael Jones-Lee
  • John Wildman
  • Emily Lancsar
  • Angela Robinson
  • Phil Bacon
  • Jan Abel Olsen
  • Dorte Gyrd-Hansen
  • Trine Kjaer
  • Mickael Beck
  • Jytte Seested Nielsen
  • Ulf Persson
  • Annika Bergman
  • Christel Protière

    (Epidémiologie et Sciences Sociales Appliquées à l'Innovation Médicale - Université de la Méditerranée - Aix-Marseille 2 - INSERM - Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale)

  • Jean Paul Moatti
  • Stephane Luchini

    (GREQAM - Groupement de Recherche en Économie Quantitative d'Aix-Marseille - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - AMU - Aix Marseille Université - ECM - École Centrale de Marseille - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Jose Luis Pinto Prades
  • Awad Mataria
  • Rana Khatib
  • Yara Jaralla
  • Werner Brouwer
  • Job van Exel
  • Roman Topór-Madry
  • Adam Kozierkiewicz
  • Darek Poznanski
  • Ewa Kocot
  • László Gulácsi

    (Health Economics and Technology Assessment Research Centre - Corvinus University of Budapest)

  • Márta Péntek

    (Rheumatology - Flor Ferenc County Hospital)

  • Samer Kharroubi
  • Andrea Manca
  • Phil Shackley

Abstract

Governments across Europe are required to make decisions about how best to allocate scarce health care resources. There are legitimate arguments for eliciting societal vales in relation to health care resource allocation given the roles of the general public as payers and potential patients. However, relatively little is known about the views of the general public on general principles which could guide these decisions. In this paper we present five societal viewpoints on principles for health care resources allocation and develop a new approach, Q2S, designed to investigate the extent to which these views are held across a range of European countries.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Cam Donaldson & Rachel Baker & Helen Mason & Mark Pennington & Sue Bell & Michael Jones-Lee & John Wildman & Emily Lancsar & Angela Robinson & Phil Bacon & Jan Abel Olsen & Dorte Gyrd-Hansen & Trine K, 2016. "From representing views to representativeness of views: Illustrating a new (Q2S) approach in the context of health care priority setting in nine European countries," Post-Print hal-01928064, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01928064
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.08.036
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. McHugh, Neil & van Exel, Job & Mason, Helen & Godwin, Jon & Collins, Marissa & Donaldson, Cam & Baker, Rachel, 2018. "Are life-extending treatments for terminal illnesses a special case? Exploring choices and societal viewpoints," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 61-69.
    2. van Hulsen, Merel A.J. & Rohde, Kirsten I.M. & van Exel, Job, 2023. "Preferences for investment in and allocation of additional healthcare capacity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 320(C).
    3. Rotteveel, Adriënne H. & Lambooij, Mattijs S. & van Exel, Job & de Wit, G. Ardine, 2022. "To what extent do citizens support the disinvestment of healthcare interventions? An exploration of the support for four viewpoints on active disinvestment in the Netherlands," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 293(C).
    4. Scheefhals, Zoë T.M. & de Vries, Eline F. & Struijs, Jeroen N. & Numans, Mattijs E. & van Exel, Job, 2024. "Stakeholder perspectives on payment reform in maternity care in the Netherlands: A Q-methodology study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 340(C).
    5. Lancsar, Emily & Gu, Yuanyuan & Gyrd-Hansen, Dorte & Butler, Jim & Ratcliffe, Julie & Bulfone, Liliana & Donaldson, Cam, 2020. "The relative value of different QALY types," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    6. Helen Mason & Marissa Collins & Neil McHugh & Jon Godwin & Job Van Exel & Cam Donaldson & Rachel Baker, 2018. "Is “end of life” a special case? Connecting Q with survey methods to measure societal support for views on the value of life‐extending treatments," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(5), pages 819-831, May.
    7. Lise Desireé Hansen & Trine Kjær & Dorte Gyrd‐Hansen, 2025. "The Citizens' Distributional Preferences for Health Care Resource Allocations: The Non‐Negligible Role of Option Value," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(10), pages 1773-1781, October.
    8. Rotteveel, A.H. & Reckers-Droog, V.T. & Lambooij, M.S. & de Wit, G.A. & van Exel, N.J.A., 2021. "Societal views in the Netherlands on active disinvestment of publicly funded healthcare interventions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    9. Reckers-Droog, Vivian & Jansen, Maarten & Bijlmakers, Leon & Baltussen, Rob & Brouwer, Werner & van Exel, Job, 2020. "How does participating in a deliberative citizens panel on healthcare priority setting influence the views of participants?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 143-151.
    10. Werner Brouwer & Pieter van Baal & Job van Exel & Matthijs Versteegh, 2019. "When is it too expensive? Cost-effectiveness thresholds and health care decision-making," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(2), pages 175-180, March.
    11. Puckett, Cassidy & Wong, Jenise C. & Daley, Tanicia C. & Cossen, Kristina, 2020. "How organizations shape medical technology allocation: Insulin pumps and pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 249(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hal:journl:hal-01928064. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.