Koch T
Department of Geography, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Soc Sci Med. 2001 Feb;52(3):453-65. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(00)00154-4.
Proscriptive planning exercises are critical to and generally accepted as integral to health planning at varying scales. These require specific instruments designed to predict future actions on the basis of present knowledge. At the macro-level of health economics, for example, a number of future-oriented Quality of Life Instruments (QL) are commonly employed. At the level of individual decision making, on the other hand, Advance Directives (AD's) are advanced as a means by which healthy individuals can assure their wishes will be carried out if at some future point they are incapacitated. As proscriptive tools, both instrument classes appear to share an axiomatic set whose individual parts have not been rigorously considered. This paper attempts to first identify and then consider a set of five axioms underlying future oriented health planning instruments. These axioms are then critiqued using data from a pre-test survey designed specifically to address their assumptions. Results appear to challenge the validity of the axioms underlying the proscriptive planning instruments.
规范性规划活动对于不同规模的卫生规划至关重要,并且被普遍认为是其不可或缺的一部分。这些活动需要特定的工具,旨在根据现有知识预测未来行动。例如,在卫生经济学的宏观层面,一些面向未来的生活质量工具(QL)被普遍采用。另一方面,在个人决策层面,预立医疗指示(AD)被提出,作为健康个体确保如果未来某个时候他们丧失行为能力,其意愿将得到执行的一种手段。作为规范性工具,这两类工具似乎都共享一组公理集,但其各个部分尚未得到严格考量。本文试图首先识别,然后考量构成面向未来的卫生规划工具基础的一组五条公理。然后使用专门为检验其假设而设计的预测试调查数据对这些公理进行批判。结果似乎对规范性规划工具所依据公理的有效性提出了挑战。