Business School, Xi'an International Studies University, Xi'an, China.
College of Economics, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.
PLoS One. 2020 Jul 2;15(7):e0235531. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235531. eCollection 2020.
The Future Health Index (FHI) is developed by the Royal Philips to help determine the readiness of countries to address global health challenges and build sustainable, fit-for-purpose national health systems. The FHI 2018 presents the Value Measure to measure the value of 16 health systems, which is formulated by taking the arithmetic average of Access, Satisfaction and Efficiency. However, this scheme is not the Pareto optimal and loses association with weights. For these reasons, this paper proposes to apply the social choice theory and Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis for group decision making (SMAA-2) to measure the value of health systems, by means of re-constructing the Value Measure. Specifically, we begin with considering all possible individual preferences among Access, Satisfaction and Efficiency, which is mathematically represented by ranked weights of them; the pessimistic and optimistic outcomes under certain individual preference are derived in a closed-form manner, according to which an interval decision matrix is then formulated; the SMAA-2 is then lastly applied to compute the holistic acceptability index, which is considered as a revised Value Measure. An empirical study using the data of 16 health systems is conducted to show the effectiveness and superiority of our method. It is demonstrated that our method always outperforms the Value Measure, by means of comparing the Spearman's rank correlation coefficients.
未来健康指数(FHI)由皇家飞利浦开发,旨在帮助确定各国应对全球健康挑战和建立可持续、适合目的的国家卫生系统的准备情况。FHI 2018 提出了价值衡量标准来衡量 16 个卫生系统的价值,该衡量标准通过对可及性、满意度和效率进行算术平均来制定。然而,这种方案不是帕累托最优的,并且与权重失去了关联。出于这些原因,本文提出应用社会选择理论和随机多准则可接受性分析进行群体决策(SMAA-2)来衡量卫生系统的价值,通过重新构建价值衡量标准。具体来说,我们首先考虑可及性、满意度和效率之间所有可能的个体偏好,这在数学上由它们的排名权重表示;根据特定个体偏好下的悲观和乐观结果,以封闭形式推导出来,然后根据这些结果制定一个区间决策矩阵;最后应用 SMAA-2 计算整体可接受性指数,该指数被视为修正后的价值衡量标准。使用 16 个卫生系统的数据进行实证研究,以展示我们方法的有效性和优越性。通过比较斯皮尔曼等级相关系数,证明我们的方法始终优于价值衡量标准。