Culyer, A.J. and Lomas, J. (2006) Deliberative processes and evidence-informed decision-making in health care: do they work and how might we know? Evidence and Policy, 2 (3). pp. 357-371. ISSN 1744-2648
Full text not available from this repository.Abstract
Evidence-informed decisions are conjectured to be better than un-evidenced ones. Evidence is classified into three types: context-free scientific, context-sensitive scientific and colloquial. A deliberative process provides guidance informed by relevant scientific evidence, interpreted in a relevant context wherever possible with context-sensitive scientific evidence and, where not, by the best available colloquial evidence. Some characteristics of an empirical approach to the evaluation of the impact of deliberative processes on the quality of decisions in healthcare are identified. These are centred on the selection of key outcomes, key characteristics and having explicit alternatives as comparator.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Academic Units: | The University of York > Centre for Health Economics (York) |
| Depositing User: | York RAE Import |
| Date Deposited: | 11 Jun 2009 10:59 |
| Last Modified: | 11 Jun 2009 10:59 |
| Published Version: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1332/174426406778023658 |
| Status: | Published |
| Publisher: | Policy Press |
| Identification Number: | 10.1332/174426406778023658 |
| URI: | http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/id/eprint/6126 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
