↓ Skip to main content

Efficiency and equity considerations in the preferences of health policy-makers in Israel

Overview of attention for article published in Israel Journal of Health Policy Research, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Efficiency and equity considerations in the preferences of health policy-makers in Israel
Published in
Israel Journal of Health Policy Research, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13584-017-0142-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amir Shmueli, Ofra Golan, Francesco Paolucci, Emmanouil Mentzakis

Abstract

There is a traditional tension in public policy between the maximization of welfare from given resources (efficiency) and considerations related to the distribution of welfare among the population and to social justice (equity). The aim of this paper is to measure the relative weights of the efficiency- and equity-enhancing criteria in the preferences of health policy-makers in Israel, and to compare the Israeli results with those of other countries. We used the criteria of efficiency and equity which were adopted in a previous international study, adapted to Israel. The equity criteria, as defined in the international study, are: severity of the disease, age (young vs. elderly), and the extent to which the poor are subsidized. Efficiency is represented by the criteria: the potential number of beneficiaries, the extent of the health benefits to the patient, and the results of economic assessments (cost per QALY gained). We contacted 147 policy-makers, 65 of whom completed the survey (a response rate of 44%). Using Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) methodology by 1000Minds software, we estimated the relative weights of these seven criteria, and predicted the desirability of technologies characterized by profiles of the criteria. The overall weight attached to the four efficiency criteria was 46% and that of the three equity criteria was 54%. The most important criteria were "financing of the technology is required so that the poor will be able to receive it" and the level of individual benefit. "The technology is intended to be used by the elderly" criterion appeared as the least important, taking the seventh place. Policy-makers who had experience as members of the Basket Committee appear to prefer efficiency criteria more than those who had never participated in the Basket Committee deliberations. While the efficiency consideration gained preference in most countries studied, Israel is unique in its balance between the weights attached to equity and efficiency considerations by health policy-makers. The study explored the trade-off between efficiency and equity considerations in the preferences of health policy-makers in Israel. The way these declarative preferences have been expressed in actual policy decisions remains to be explored.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 48 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 16%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Student > Master 7 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 13 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 27%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 11 22%
Unknown 12 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 July 2017.
All research outputs
#5,768,574
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from Israel Journal of Health Policy Research
#120
of 578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,218
of 309,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Israel Journal of Health Policy Research
#3
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 578 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 309,584 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.