Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Ment Health. 2013 Apr;22(2):122-34. doi: 10.3109/09638237.2012.745189. Epub 2013 Jan 16.

Priority-setting for mental health services.

Author information

1
Deakin Health Economics, Population Health Strategic Research Cluster, Deakin University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. cathy.mihalopoulos@deakin.edu.au

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Economic evaluation of individual interventions can have limited usefulness due to the potential for methodological confounding, particularly for those decision contexts where strategies involving multiple interventions are required.

AIMS:

To introduce readers to different approaches of priority-setting, with a focus on economics-based examples of priority-setting in mental health.

METHOD:

A selective review of the priority-setting literature, with particular attention given to the mental health context and economics-based approaches.

RESULTS:

Six priority-setting approaches in mental health are described and assessed.

CONCLUSIONS:

Priority-setting approaches that incorporate methodological rigour, due process for involving stakeholders and broad-based notions of "benefit", are likely to be of most use to mental healthcare decision-makers. Challenges, both in relation to data bases and method remain, but are within the capacity of the mental health research community to resolve.

PMID:
23323752
DOI:
10.3109/09638237.2012.745189
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Taylor & Francis
    Loading ...
    Support Center