Display options
Cite
Fehr R, Alexanderson K, Favaretti C, et al. Health assessments for health governance-concepts and methodologies. Eur J Public Health. 2017;27(4):609-616doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckx062.
Fehr, R., Alexanderson, K., Favaretti, C., de Jong, J., La Torre, G., Lim, T. A., Martin-Olmedo, P., Mekel, O. C. L., Michelsen, K., Rosenkötter, N., Verschuuren, M., de Waure, C., & Zeegers Paget, D. (2017). Health assessments for health governance-concepts and methodologies. European journal of public health, 27(4), 609-616. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckx062
Fehr, Rainer, et al. "Health assessments for health governance-concepts and methodologies." European journal of public health vol. 27,4 (2017): 609-616. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckx062
Fehr R, Alexanderson K, Favaretti C, de Jong J, La Torre G, Lim TA, Martin-Olmedo P, Mekel OCL, Michelsen K, Rosenkötter N, Verschuuren M, de Waure C, Zeegers Paget D. Health assessments for health governance-concepts and methodologies. Eur J Public Health. 2017 Aug 01;27(4):609-616. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckx062. PMID: 28961876.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Eur J Public Health. 2017 Aug 01;27(4):609-616. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckx062.

Health assessments for health governance-concepts and methodologies.

European journal of public health

Rainer Fehr, Kristina Alexanderson, Carlo Favaretti, Judith de Jong, Giuseppe La Torre, Tek-Ang Lim, Piedad Martin-Olmedo, Odile C L Mekel, Kai Michelsen, Nicole Rosenkötter, Marieke Verschuuren, Chiara de Waure, Dineke Zeegers Paget

Affiliations

  1. Fakultät für Gesundheitswissenschaften, Universität Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany.
  2. Division of Insurance Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
  3. Istituto di Sanità Pubblica, Sezione di Igiene, Centro di Ricerca e Studi sulla Leadership in Medicina, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy.
  4. Health Care System and Governance, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  5. Dipartimento di Sanità Pubblica e Malattie Infettive, Sapienza Università di Roma, Roma, Italy.
  6. Office for Scientific and International Affairs, Santé publique France, Saint-Maurice, France.
  7. Health Service Management Research, Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública, Granada, Spain.
  8. Division of Health Data and Assessments, Health Care System, NRW Centre for Health (LZG.NRW), Bielefeld, Germany.
  9. Department of International Health, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
  10. Centre for Health Knowledge Integration, Centre for Health and Society, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
  11. European Public Health Association, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

PMID: 28961876 DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckx062

Abstract

BACKGROUND: For better supporting the science-governance interface, the potential of health assessments appears underrated.

AIMS: To identify what various types of health assessment have in common; how they differ; which assessment(s) to apply for which purpose; and what needs and options there are for future joint development.

METHODS: This review is based on five types of health assessment: monitoring/surveillance/reporting, assessment of health impact, of health technology, of health systems performance, health-related economic assessment. The approach is exploratory and includes: applying an agreed set of comparative criteria; circulating and supplementing synoptic tables; and interpreting the results.

RESULTS: Two of the assessments deal with the question 'Where do we stand?', two others with variants of 'What if' questions. Economic Assessment can take place in combination with any of the others. The assessments involve both overall 'procedures' and a variety of 'methods' which inescapably reflect some subjective assumptions and decisions, e.g. on issue framing. Resources and assistance exist for all these assessments. The paper indicates which type of assessment is appropriate for what purpose.

CONCLUSIONS: Although scientific soundness of health assessments is not trivial to secure, existing types of health assessment can be interpreted as a useful 'toolkit' for supporting governance. If current traces of 'silo' thinking can be overcome, the attainability of a more unified culture of health assessments increases and such assessments might more widely be recognized as a prime, 'tried and tested' way to voice Public Health knowledge and to support rational governance and policy-making.

© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. All rights reserved.

MeSH terms

Publication Types