Tehran University of Medical Sciences

Science Communicator Platform

Stay connected! Follow us on X network (Twitter):
Share this content! On (X network) By
Healthcare Priority-Setting Criteria and Social Values in Iran: An Investigation of Local Evidence Publisher Pubmed



Goudarzi Z1 ; Bijlmakers L2 ; Nouhi M3 ; Jahangiri R4 ; Heydari M5 ; Simangolwa W6, 7 ; Hakimzadeh SM4 ; Jara KT8
Authors
Show Affiliations
Authors Affiliations
  1. 1. Health Human Resources Research Center, Department of Health Economics, School of Management and Medical Informatics, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
  2. 2. Department of Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
  3. 3. National Institute for Health Research, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  4. 4. Heath Economics and Management Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  5. 5. Department of Policy Analysis, National Agency for Strategic Research in Medical Education, Ministry of Health and Medical Education, Tehran, Iran
  6. 6. Health Economics and HIV and AIDS Research Division (HEARD), University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
  7. 7. Department of Patient Education, Patient and Citizen Involvement in Health, Lusaka, Zambia
  8. 8. Department of Health Economics, School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, Netherlands

Source: International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care Published:2023


Abstract

Introduction Integrating social values into health technology assessment processes is an important component of proper healthcare priority setting. This study aims to identify social values related to healthcare priority setting in Iran. Method A scoping review was conducted on original studies that investigating social values in the healthcare system in Iran. The databases of PubMed, EMBASE, and EBSCO were searched with no restrictions on time and language. The reported criteria were clustered using Sham's framework of social value analysis in health policy. Results Twenty-one studies published between 2008 and 2022 met the inclusion criteria. Fourteen of the included studies followed a quantitative approach with different methods to identify criteria, and the remaining seven studies used a qualitative approach. A total of fifty-five criteria were extracted and clustered into necessity, quality, sustainability, and process categories. Only six studies found criteria that were related to processes. Only three studies used public opinions as a source of value identification and eleven studies investigated the weight of criteria. None of the included studies explored the interdependency of the criteria. Conclusion Evidence suggests that several criteria other than cost per health unit also need to be considered in healthcare priority setting. Previous studies have paid little attention to the social values that underlie priority setting and policy-making processes. To reach consensus on social values related to healthcare priority setting, future researches need to involve broader stakeholders' perspectives as a valuable source of social values in a fair process. © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press.