Suggestions in maternal and child health for the National Technology Assessment Programme: a consideration of consumer and professional priorities

Author:

Johanson R,Rigby C1,Newburn M2,Stewart M3,Jones P4

Affiliation:

1. Keele University, Room 75, Keele Hall, Newcastle, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, England,

2. Policy Research Department, National Childbirth Trust, Alexandra House, Oldham Terrace, London W3 6NH, England

3. School of Maternal and Child Health, Faculty of Health and Social Care, University of West England Bristol, Blackberry Hill, Stapleton, Bristol BS16 1DD, England,

4. Mathematics Department, Keele University, Mackay Building, Newcastle, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, England

Abstract

In North Staffordshire, the Achieving Sustainable Quality in Maternity (ASQUAM) meetings provide the programme for clinical guidelines and audit over the following year. The ASQUAM clinical effectiveness programme has attempted to address a number of the issues identified as obstacles to informed democratic prioritisation. For example, it became clear that a number of topics raised were actually research questions. The organisers therefore decided to split the fourth ASQUAM day into an ‘audit’ morning and a ‘research’ afternoon. The meeting organised by RJ, CR and PJ in partnership with the Midwives Information and Resource Service and the National Childbirth Trust, was timed to allow the research ideas to feed into the national Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme. This meeting was designed to increase the profile of ASQUAM amongst consumers and to increase their representation at the meeting. Objectives were to choose a new set of research priorities for the year 2000, and to ascertain the voting pattern of comparison to health professionals. There was overall agreement in terms of priorities, with the consumer group prioritising 8 of the 10 topics chosen by the professionals (or 10 of the 11). No significant differences between the proportions of voted cast for each topic by professionals and consumers were found apart from topic 20. The numbers of consumers were small which does limit the number the validity of statistical comparisons. Nevertheless, it is clear that voting patterns were similar. Overall the process suggests that democratic prioritisation is a viable option and one that may become essential within the framework of clinical and research governance.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3