Priority Setting Meets Multiple Streams: A Match to Be Further Examined?; Comment on 'Introducing New Priority Setting and Resource Allocation Processes in a Canadian Healthcare Organization: A Case Study Analysis Informed by Multiple Streams Theory'

J. Cumming
{"title":"Priority Setting Meets Multiple Streams: A Match to Be Further Examined?; Comment on 'Introducing New Priority Setting and Resource Allocation Processes in a Canadian Healthcare Organization: A Case Study Analysis Informed by Multiple Streams Theory'","authors":"J. Cumming","doi":"10.15171/ijhpm.2016.58","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With demand for health services continuing to grow as populations age and new technologies emerge to meet health needs, healthcare policy-makers are under constant pressure to set priorities, ie, to make choices about the health services that can and cannot be funded within available resources. In a recent paper, Smith et al apply an influential policy studies framework - Kingdon's multiple streams approach (MSA) - to explore the factors that explain why one health service delivery organization adopted a formal priority setting framework (in the form of programme budgeting and marginal analysis [PBMA]) to assist it in making priority setting decisions. MSA is a theory of agenda-setting, ie, how it is that different issues do or do not reach a decision-making point. In this paper, I reflect on the use of the MSA framework to explore priority setting processes and how the framework might be applied to similar cases in future.","PeriodicalId":220467,"journal":{"name":"IRPN: Innovation & Health Law & Policy (Topic)","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IRPN: Innovation & Health Law & Policy (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2016.58","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

With demand for health services continuing to grow as populations age and new technologies emerge to meet health needs, healthcare policy-makers are under constant pressure to set priorities, ie, to make choices about the health services that can and cannot be funded within available resources. In a recent paper, Smith et al apply an influential policy studies framework - Kingdon's multiple streams approach (MSA) - to explore the factors that explain why one health service delivery organization adopted a formal priority setting framework (in the form of programme budgeting and marginal analysis [PBMA]) to assist it in making priority setting decisions. MSA is a theory of agenda-setting, ie, how it is that different issues do or do not reach a decision-making point. In this paper, I reflect on the use of the MSA framework to explore priority setting processes and how the framework might be applied to similar cases in future.
优先级设置满足多个流:一个需要进一步检查的匹配?对“在加拿大医疗机构引入新的优先级设置和资源分配流程:基于多流理论的案例研究分析”的评论
随着人口老龄化和满足卫生需求的新技术的出现,对卫生服务的需求持续增长,卫生保健政策制定者面临着确定优先事项的持续压力,即在现有资源范围内对能够和不能提供资金的卫生服务做出选择。在最近的一篇论文中,Smith等人应用了一个有影响力的政策研究框架——Kingdon's multiple streams approach (MSA)——来探索解释为什么一个卫生服务提供组织采用正式的优先设置框架(以规划预算和边际分析[PBMA]的形式)来协助其做出优先设置决策的因素。MSA是一种议程设置理论,即不同的问题如何达到或不达到决策点。在本文中,我思考了如何使用MSA框架来探索优先级设置过程,以及如何将该框架应用于未来的类似案例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书