• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

公众舆论在药品资源分配决策中的作用。

The role of public opinion in drug resource allocation decisions.

作者信息

Melfi C A, Drake B G, Tierney W M

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis, USA.

出版信息

Pharmacoeconomics. 1996 Feb;9(2):106-12. doi: 10.2165/00019053-199609020-00002.

DOI:10.2165/00019053-199609020-00002
PMID:10160089
Abstract

Drug resource allocation decisions have a very real and direct impact on the public, due to cost and availability constraints resulting from these decisions. This presents an opportunity for public opinion to play an important role in influencing decisions that have far-reaching effects. Public opinion regarding pharmaceutical issues is influenced by drug companies, special interest groups, researchers and others. Since these groups often have conflicting goals, they may send contradictory messages to the public. In this article, we examine the issues of who comprises the public, how public opinion is influenced and what impact public opinion does and should have on drug resource allocation decisions. We emphasise that, for appropriate resource allocation decisions to be made, there is a continuing need to conduct high quality outcomes research and to continue the trend of increasing interest in how drugs are used rather than how much is sold or how much they cost. There is also a major role for pharmacoeconomic research to play in this issue, with a real need to make such research accessible and understandable by the public, including patients, physicians, pharmacists and policy makers, so that policy decisions can be based on such research.

摘要

由于药物资源分配决策所导致的成本和可得性限制,这些决策对公众有着非常切实和直接的影响。这为公众舆论在影响具有深远影响的决策方面发挥重要作用提供了契机。关于制药问题的公众舆论受到制药公司、特殊利益集团、研究人员及其他方面的影响。由于这些群体往往目标相互冲突,他们可能会向公众传递相互矛盾的信息。在本文中,我们探讨了构成公众的群体、公众舆论是如何受到影响的,以及公众舆论对药物资源分配决策已经产生和应该产生何种影响等问题。我们强调,为了做出恰当的资源分配决策,持续开展高质量的疗效研究以及延续对药物使用方式而非销量或成本的关注度不断上升的趋势是很有必要的。药物经济学研究在这个问题上也能发挥重要作用,切实需要让包括患者、医生、药剂师和政策制定者在内的公众能够理解并获取此类研究成果,以便政策决策能够基于这些研究。

相似文献

1
The role of public opinion in drug resource allocation decisions.公众舆论在药品资源分配决策中的作用。
Pharmacoeconomics. 1996 Feb;9(2):106-12. doi: 10.2165/00019053-199609020-00002.
2
Minnesota public opinion on health care resource allocation.
Minn Med. 1994 Nov;77(11):19-23.
3
Public healthcare resource allocation and the Rule of Rescue.公共医疗资源分配与救援原则。
J Med Ethics. 2008 Jul;34(7):540-4. doi: 10.1136/jme.2007.021790.
4
Is there a role for physicians in health and medical resource allocation?医生在健康和医疗资源分配中是否能发挥作用?
Ann R Coll Physicians Surg Can. 1994 Feb;27(1):12-4.
5
A framework for involving the public in health care coverage and resource allocation decisions.让公众参与医疗保健覆盖范围和资源分配决策的框架。
Healthc Manage Forum. 2008 Winter;21(4):6-21. doi: 10.1016/S0840-4704(10)60050-6.
6
[Limits of optimizing resource allocation by debiting the public health service].
Gesundheitswesen. 1997 May;59(5):338-43.
7
Delisting policy reform in South Korea: failed or policy change?韩国摘牌政策改革:失败抑或政策转向?
Value Health. 2012 Jan;15(1):204-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.08.1738. Epub 2011 Nov 23.
8
Resource allocation and economic evaluation in Australia's healthcare system.澳大利亚医疗体系中的资源分配与经济评估。
Aust Health Rev. 2011 Aug;35(3):278-83. doi: 10.1071/AH10890.
9
Resource allocation, health policy, and rationing craniofacial care.资源分配、卫生政策与颅面护理配给
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1995 Nov;32(6):515-9. doi: 10.1597/1545-1569_1995_032_0515_rahpar_2.3.co_2.
10
[Relevance and financing of health services: a survey of physicians, students, patients, nursing personnel and seniors].[卫生服务的相关性与融资:对医生、学生、患者、护理人员及老年人的一项调查]
Gesundheitswesen. 2001 May;63(5):311-8. doi: 10.1055/s-2001-14212.

引用本文的文献

1
Social connection as a critical factor for mental and physical health: evidence, trends, challenges, and future implications.社会联系作为身心健康的关键因素:证据、趋势、挑战及未来影响
World Psychiatry. 2024 Oct;23(3):312-332. doi: 10.1002/wps.21224.
2
Israeli lay persons' views on priority-setting criteria for Alzheimer's disease.以色列普通民众对阿尔茨海默病优先排序标准的看法。
Health Expect. 2009 Jun;12(2):187-96. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00523.x. Epub 2009 Mar 23.
3
Public views on priority setting for high cost medications in public hospitals in Australia.

本文引用的文献

1
Medicaid formularies: a critical review of the literature.
J Pharm Mark Manage. 1988 Spring;2(3):39-61. doi: 10.3109/j058v02n03_05.
2
Projecting future drug expenditures--1993.预测未来药品支出——1993年
Am J Hosp Pharm. 1993 Jan;50(1):71-7.
3
The role of pharmacoeconomic guidelines for formulary approval: the Australian experience.药物经济学指南在处方集批准中的作用:澳大利亚的经验。
Clin Ther. 1993 Nov-Dec;15(6):1154-76; discussion 1120.
澳大利亚公众对公立医院高成本药物的优先排序看法。
Health Expect. 2007 Sep;10(3):224-35. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00439.x.
4
Physicians in health care management: 8. The patient-physician partnership: decision making, problem solving and the desire to participate.医疗保健管理中的医生:8. 医患伙伴关系:决策、问题解决与参与意愿。
CMAJ. 1994 Aug 15;151(4):423-7.
5
Integration of economic appraisal and health care policy in a health insurance system; the Dutch case.医疗保险体系中经济评估与医疗保健政策的整合;荷兰案例
Soc Sci Med. 1994 Jun;38(12):1609-14. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(94)90061-2.
6
Evaluating drugs after their approval for clinical use.在药物获批临床使用后对其进行评估。
N Engl J Med. 1993 Dec 30;329(27):2029-32. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199312303292710.
7
Global budgeting in Germany: lessons for the United States.
Health Aff (Millwood). 1994 Fall;13(4):7-21. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.13.4.7.
8
Variation in patient utilities for outcomes of the management of chronic stable angina. Implications for clinical practice guidelines. Ischemic Heart Disease Patient Outcomes Research Team.慢性稳定型心绞痛管理结果的患者效用差异。对临床实践指南的影响。缺血性心脏病患者预后研究团队。
JAMA. 1995 Apr 19;273(15):1185-90.
9
Patient reactions to a program designed to facilitate patient participation in treatment decisions for benign prostatic hyperplasia.患者对一项旨在促进患者参与良性前列腺增生治疗决策的项目的反应。
Med Care. 1995 Aug;33(8):771-82. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199508000-00003.
10
British public opinion on National Health Service reform.英国公众对国民医疗服务体系改革的看法。
Health Aff (Millwood). 1989 Winter;8(4):52-62. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.8.4.52.