Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (30)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Paalman, M
Right arrow Articles by Nyheim, D
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Paalman, M
Right arrow Articles by Nyheim, D
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Health Policy and Planning, Vol 13, 13-31, Copyright © 1998 by Oxford University Press

ARTICLES

A critical review of priority setting in the health sector: the methodology of the 1993 World Development Report

M Paalman, H Bekedam, L Hawken and D Nyheim
Consultant, The Netherlands; WHO Cambodia; WHO Geneva, Switzerland; International Alert London, UK

The 1993 World Development Report, Investing in Health, suggests policies to assist governments of developing countries in improving the health of their populations. A new methodology to improve government spending is introduced. Epidemiological and economic analyses form the basis for a global priority setting exercise, leading to a recommended essential public health and clinical services package for low- and middle-income countries. Ministries of Health in many countries have expressed an interest in designing a national package of essential health services, using the methodology. Given the apparent importance attached to the study and its far reaching potential consequences, this article provides an overview of the method, the main issues and problems in estimating the burden of disease as well as the cost-effectiveness of interventions. Strengths and weaknesses in the databases, value judgements and assumptions are identified, leading to a critical analysis of the validity of the priority setting exercise on the global level.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Scand J Public HealthHome page
J. Sundby
Are women disfavoured in the estimation of Disability Adjusted Life Years and the Global Burden of Disease?
Scand J Public Health, October 1, 1999; 27(4): 279 - 285.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.