Abelson Julia, Forest Pierre-Gerlier, Eyles John, Smith Patricia, Martin Elisabeth, Gauvin Francois-Pierre
Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, Health Sciences Centre, Rm 3H28, McMaster University, 1200 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, Canada, L8N 3Z5.
Soc Sci Med. 2003 Jul;57(2):239-51. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00343-x.
A common thread weaving through the current public participation debate is the need for new approaches that emphasize two-way interaction between decision makers and the public as well as deliberation among participants. Increasingly complex decision making processes require a more informed citizenry that has weighed the evidence on the issue, discussed and debated potential decision options and arrived at a mutually agreed upon decision or at least one by which all parties can abide. We explore the recent fascination with deliberative methods for public involvement first by examining their origins within democratic theory, and then by focusing on the experiences with deliberative methods within the health sector. In doing so, we answer the following questions "What are deliberative methods and why have they become so popular? What are their potential contributions to the health sector?" We use this critical review of the literature as the basis for developing general principles that can be used to guide the design and evaluation of public involvement processes for the health-care sector in particular.
贯穿当前公众参与辩论的一个共同主线是，需要采用新方法，强调决策者与公众之间的双向互动以及参与者之间的审议。日益复杂的决策过程要求民众更加了解情况，他们要权衡该问题的证据，讨论并辩论潜在的决策选项，并达成共同商定的决策，或者至少是各方都能遵守的决策。我们首先通过审视其在民主理论中的起源，然后关注卫生部门内审议方法的经验，来探讨近期对公众参与审议方法的热衷。在此过程中，我们回答以下问题：“什么是审议方法，它们为何如此受欢迎？它们对卫生部门有哪些潜在贡献？”我们以对文献的这一批判性综述为基础，制定可用于指导特别是医疗保健部门公众参与过程的设计和评估的一般原则。
