Decisions of Value: Going Backstage; Comment on “Contextual Factors Influencing Cost and Quality Decisions in Health and Care: A Structured Evidence Review and Narrative Synthesis”

Publish Year: 1397
نوع سند: مقاله ژورنالی
زبان: English
View: 31

متن کامل این Paper منتشر نشده است و فقط به صورت چکیده یا چکیده مبسوط در پایگاه موجود می باشد.
توضیح: معمولا کلیه مقالاتی که کمتر از ۵ صفحه باشند در پایگاه سیویلیکا اصل Paper (فول تکست) محسوب نمی شوند و فقط کاربران عضو بدون کسر اعتبار می توانند فایل آنها را دریافت نمایند.

  • Certificate
  • من نویسنده این مقاله هستم

استخراج به نرم افزارهای پژوهشی:

لینک ثابت به این Paper:

شناسه ملی سند علمی:

JR_HPM-7-11_014

تاریخ نمایه سازی: 18 مرداد 1403

Abstract:

This commentary expands on two of the key themes briefly raised in the paper involving analysis of the evidence about key contextual influences on decisions of value. The first theme focuses on the need to explore in more detail what is called backstage decision-making looking at how actual decisions are made drawing on evidence from ethnographies about decision-making. These studies point to less of an emphasis on instrumental and calculative forms of decision-making with more of an emphasis on more pragmatic rationality. The second related theme picks up on the issue of sources of information as a contextual influence particularly highlighting the salience of uncertainty or information deficits. It is argued that there are a range of different types of uncertainties, not only associated with information deficits, which are found particularly in allocative types of decisions of value. This means that the decision-making process although attempting to be linear and rational, tends to be characterised by a form of navigation where the decision-makers navigate their way through the uncertainties inherent and overtly manifested in the decision-making process.

Authors

Michael Calnan

Social Policy, Sociology and Social Research (SSPSSR), University of Kent, Canterbury, UK

مراجع و منابع این Paper:

لیست زیر مراجع و منابع استفاده شده در این Paper را نمایش می دهد. این مراجع به صورت کاملا ماشینی و بر اساس هوش مصنوعی استخراج شده اند و لذا ممکن است دارای اشکالاتی باشند که به مرور زمان دقت استخراج این محتوا افزایش می یابد. مراجعی که مقالات مربوط به آنها در سیویلیکا نمایه شده و پیدا شده اند، به خود Paper لینک شده اند :
  • Flynn R, Williams G, Pickard S. Markets and Networks. Buckingham: ...
  • Williams I, Brown H, Healy P. Contextual Factors Influencing Cost ...
  • Pettigrew A. The Awakening Giant: Continuity and Change in Imperial ...
  • Hedgecoe AM. Trust and regulatory organisations: The role of local ...
  • Mechanic D. Muddling through elegantly: finding the proper balance in ...
  • Daniels N. Accountability for reasonableness. BMJ. ۲۰۰۰;۳۲۱(۷۲۷۲):۱۳۰۰-۱۳۰۱ ...
  • Daniels N, Sabin JE. Accountability for reasonableness: an update. BMJ. ...
  • Calnan M, Hashem F, Brown P. Still Elegantly Muddling Through? ...
  • Russell J, Greenhalgh T. Being 'rational' and being 'human': How ...
  • Hughes D, Doheny S. Deliberating Tarceva: A case study of ...
  • Brown P, Calnan M. NICE technology appraisals: working with multiple ...
  • Claxton K, Sculpher M, Drummond M. A rational framework for ...
  • Ferrario A, Kanavos P. Dealing with uncertainty and high prices ...
  • Moreira T. Health care rationing in an age of uncertainty: ...
  • Abraham J. The pharmaceutical industry, the state, and the NHS. ...
  • Schrecker T. Priority Setting: Right Answer to a Far Too ...
  • Baltussen R, Jansen MP, Mikkelsen E, et al. Priority Setting ...
  • Chalkidou K, Li R, Culyer AJ, Glassman A, Hofman KJ, ...
  • Checkland K, Harrison S, Coleman A. ‘Structural Interests’ in Health ...
  • Checkland K, Dam R, Hammond JON, et al. Being Autonomous ...
  • Hashem F, Calnan MW, Brown PR. Decision making in NICE ...
  • Daniels T, Williams I, Bryan S, Mitton C, Robinson S. ...
  • نمایش کامل مراجع