Mapping Priority Setting in Health in 17 Countries Across Asia, Latin America, and sub-Saharan Africa

REFERENCES

• Glassman A, Chalkidou K. Priority-setting institutions in health. Building institutions for smarter public spending. Washington, DC: Center for Global Development; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Dittrich R, Cubillos L, Gostin L, Chalkidou K, Li R. The international right to health: what does it mean in legal practice and how can it affect priority setting for universal health coverage? Health Sys Ref, this issue.
   Google Scholar
• Chalkidou K, Marten R, Cutler D, Culyer T, Smith R, Teerawattananon Y, Cluzeau F, Li R, Sullivan R, Huang Y, et al. Health technology assessment in universal health coverage. Lancet 2013; 382(9910): e48-e49.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Sixty-seventh World Health Assembly. WHA67.23. Agenda item 15.7. 24 May 2014. Health intervention and technology assessment in support of universal health coverage. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014. Available at http://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA67/A67_R23-en.pdf?ua=1
   Google Scholar
• Keohane R. International institutions: two approaches. Int Stud Q 1988; 32(4): 379-396.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forss K, Venson P. An evaluation of the capacity building efforts of United Nations operational activities in Zimbabwe: 1980–1995. Geneva: United Nations; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Willems S, Baumert K. Institutional capacity and climate actions. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Towse A, Devlin N, Hawe E, Garrison L. Consulting report. The evolution of HTA in emerging markets health care systems: analysis to support a policy response. London: Office of Health Economics; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Garrison L, Babigumira J, Bartlein R, Nguyen H. Health technology assessment in low- and middle-income countries: findings from a survey and case studies. Arlington, VA: Management Sciences for Health; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Health Interventions and Technology Assessment Program, NICE International. Situation analysis of HTA Introduction at national level, version 2.0.2013. Bangkok, Thailand: Health Interventions and Technology Assessment Program.
   Google Scholar
• Hauck K, Smith P. The politics of priority setting in health: a political economy perspective. Working Paper 414. Washington, DC: Center for Global Development; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Kingdon JW, Thurber JA. Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Boston: Little, Brown; 1984.
   Google Scholar
• Zahariadis N. Ambiguity and multiple streams. In: Theories of the policy process (3rd ed.), Sabatier P, Weible C, eds. Boulder: Westview Press; 2014; 25–58.
   Google Scholar
• Fox AM, Balarajan Y, Cheng C, Reich MR. Measuring political commitment and opportunities to advance food and nutrition security: piloting a rapid assessment tool. Health Policy Plan 2015; 30(5): 566-578.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shiffman J, Smith S. Generation of political priority for global health initiatives: a framework and case study of maternal mortality. Lancet 2007; 370(9595): 1370-1379.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guldbrandsson K, Fossum B. An exploration of the theoretical concepts policy windows and policy entrepreneurs at the Swedish public health arena. Health Promot Int 2009; 24(4): 434-444.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox AM, Goldberg AB, Gore RJ, Bärnighausen T. Conceptual and methodological challenges to measuring political commitment to respond to HIV. J Int AIDS Soc 2011; 14(Suppl 2):S5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Delvaux B, Mangez E. Towards a sociology of the knowledge–policy relation. Louvain-la-Neuve: Université Catholique de Louvain; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Hernandez-Villafuerte K, Li R, Hofman K. Author linkages in economic evaluations: tendencies in Southern Africa. Presentation by Adrian Towse to the World Health Organization, “Consultation on using health technology assessment in for universal health coverage and reimbursement systems,” 3 November 2015, WHO, Geneva.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson T. Economic evaluation: a tool for priority setting in the context UHC—learning from the international experience. Presented at the African Health Economics and Policy Association Conference, 13 March 2014, Nairobi, Kenya.
   Google Scholar
• Hernandez-Villafuerte K, Li R, Towse A, Chalkidou K. International decision support initiative: mapping of priority-setting in health for 17 low and middle countries across Asia, Latin America and Africa. Occasional Paper 2015/01. London: Office of Health Economics; 2015. Available at https://www.ohe.org/system/files/private/publications/413%20-%20International%20Decision%20Support%20Initiative%20Country%20selection%20report.pdf?download=1
   Google Scholar
• Grundy J. Myanmar: key issues and feasible options for accelerating progress to UHC.Bangkok, Thailand: WHO Regional Office for South-East Asia; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• World Bank Open Data. Free and open access to data about development in countries around the globe the world bank. Washington, DC: The World Bank; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• National Department of Health (South Africa). National health insurance in South Africa: policy paper. Pretoria: National Department of Health (South Africa); 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Garrison LP, Babigumira J, Bartlein R, Nguyen H. Health technology assessment in low- and middle-income countries: finding from a survey and case studies. Arlington, VA: Management Sciences for Health; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Rattanavipapong W, Luz ACG, Kumluang S, Kusumawardani N, Teerawattananon Y, Indriani D, Primastuti PA, Rivai LB, Idiani S, Adhie U, et al. One step back, two steps forward: an economic evaluation of the PEN program in Indonesia. Health Sys Ref, this issue.
   Google Scholar
• Itad, NICE International. Report on NICE International's engagement in India. Hove, UK: ITAD; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Chootipongchaivat S, Tritasavit N, Luz A, Teerawattananon Y, Tantivess S. Policy brief and working paper. Conducive factors to the development of health technology assessment in Asia. Bangkok, Thailand: Prince Mahidol Award Foundation; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. World health statistics 2013. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Boerma T, Eozenou P, Evans D, Evans T, Kieny M-P, Wagstaff A. Monitoring progress towards universal health coverage at country and global levels. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Global status report on noncommunicable diseases 2010. Geneva: World Health Organ ization; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Gakidou E, Nordhagen S, Obermeyer Z. Coverage of cervical cancer screening in 57 countries: low average levels and large inequalities. PLOS Med 2008; 5(6): e132.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Health system response and capacity: NCD-related tests. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Mortality: risk of premature death from target NCDs. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Saksena P, Xu K, Durairaj V. The drivers of catastrophic expenditure: outpatient services, hospitalization or medicines? Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. The selection and use of essential medicines report of the WHO Expert Committee, 2013 (including the 18th WHO model list of essential medicines and the 4th WHO model list of essential medicines for children). WHO Report Series 985. 2013. Available at http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/112729/1/WHO_TRS_985_eng.pdf
   Google Scholar
• United States Agency International Development (USAID), U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) & AIDS Free. Treatment guidance database: HIV treatment guidance database. n.d. Available at https://aidsfree.usaid.gov/resources/guidance-data/treatment
   Google Scholar
• International Osteoporosis Foundation. National & regional osteoporosis guidelines. Nyon: International Osteoporosis Foundation; 2014. Available at http://www.iofbonehealth.org/national-regional-osteoporosis-guidelines
   Google Scholar
• The World Bank. The Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) project. Washington, DC: The World Bank; 2013. Available at http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.aspx#home
   Google Scholar
• Cornell University, Institut européen d'administration des affaires, World Intellectual Property Organization. Global Innovation Index 2013: the local dynamics of innovation. Geneva; Ithaca, NY; and Fontainebleau, France: Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• The World Bank. Statistical capacity indicator. Washington, DC: The World Bank; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Transparency International. Corruption Perceptions Index 2013. Berlin: Transparency International; 2014. Available at https://www.transparency.org/cpi2013
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Recipient countries: commitments and disbursements to recipient countries, 2000–2010. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2013. Available at http://www.who.int/gho/governance_aid_effectiveness/country/en/
   Google Scholar
• The World Bank. World development indicators. Washington, DC: The World Bank; 2014. Available at http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development-indicators
   Google Scholar
• The Global Fund. Grant portfolio. Geneva: The Global Fund; 2013. Available at http://www.theglobalfund.org/en/portfolio/
   Google Scholar
• United Nations Statistics Division. UNdata: country profile: Myanmar. n.d. Available at http://data.un.org/CountryProfile.aspx?crName=MYANMAR
   Google Scholar