Suppr超能文献

医疗保健政策:定性证据与卫生技术评估

Health care policy: qualitative evidence and health technology assessment.

作者信息

Leys Mark

机构信息

Vrije Universiteit Brussel, MSW, Laarbeeklaan 103, B-1090 Brussels, Belgium.

出版信息

Health Policy. 2003 Sep;65(3):217-26. doi: 10.1016/s0168-8510(02)00209-9.

Abstract

Since the late 1990s health technology assessment (HTA) has gained influence as a research and evaluation approach supporting health care policy. The focus on this methodology is congruent with the growing importance of evidence-based health care. Although HTA is a multidisciplinary discipline from a theoretical point of view, practice shows that social, ethical and psychological aspects are seldom truly integrated into the assessment of health technology. HTA is still very much biased by the medical and pharmaceutical research traditions. This contribution focuses on the question of how qualitative research findings could be useful as an additional source of information or as 'evidence' in HTA. Medical and health care scientists are seldom acquainted with qualitative research or judge it as a less (or un-)reliable form of research. 'Qualitative dimensions' of health care are not considered 'real' evidence. This contribution argues that qualitative findings could be put higher in the hierarchy of evidence generating research in health care. First it can be realized by improving the knowledge of the nature of qualitative research. Second qualitative findings can become more trustworthy information, if researchers themselves respect methodological prerequisites and clarify their theoretical perspective, research aims and use of research methods. Some methodological characteristics of qualitative research and 'evidence' are discussed for their contribution to HTA and evidence-based health care.

摘要

自20世纪90年代末以来,卫生技术评估(HTA)作为一种支持卫生保健政策的研究与评估方法,影响力日益增强。对这种方法的关注与循证卫生保健日益重要的趋势相一致。尽管从理论角度来看,HTA是一门多学科的学科,但实践表明,社会、伦理和心理方面很少真正融入卫生技术评估之中。HTA仍然深受医学和制药研究传统的影响。本论文着重探讨定性研究结果如何能够作为一种额外的信息来源或作为HTA中的“证据”发挥作用。医学和卫生保健科学家很少了解定性研究,或将其视为一种不太(或完全不)可靠的研究形式。卫生保健的“定性维度”不被视为“真实”的证据。本论文认为,定性研究结果在卫生保健证据生成研究的证据等级中可以占据更高的位置。首先,可以通过增进对定性研究本质的了解来实现这一点。其次,如果研究人员自身尊重方法学前提条件,并阐明其理论视角、研究目的和研究方法的运用,那么定性研究结果就能成为更可靠的信息。本文讨论了定性研究和“证据”的一些方法学特征,以说明它们对HTA和循证卫生保健的贡献。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验