What should we do when people disagree? Priority setting in relation to end of life and cancer drugs
12:30pm - 1:30pm /
Monday 12th February 2018
/ Venue: Seminar Room 2 Muspratt Building
Type: Seminar /
Category: Department
- 01517945490
- Nicole Williams
- Admission: Free
Add this event to my calendar
Click on "Create a calendar file" and your browser will download a .ics file for this event.
Microsoft Outlook: Download the file, double-click it to open it in Outlook, then click on "Save & Close" to save it to your calendar. If that doesn't work go into Outlook, click on the File tab, then on Open & Export, then Open Calendar. Select your .ics file then click on "Save & Close".
Google Calendar: download the file, then go into your calendar. On the left where it says "Other calendars" click on the arrow icon and then click on Import calendar. Click on Browse and select the .ics file, then click on Import.
Apple Calendar: The file may open automatically with an option to save it to your calendar. If not, download the file, then you can either drag it to Calendar or import the file by going to File >Import > Import and choosing the .ics file.
There are legitimate arguments for public involvement in health care priority setting. One approach is to elicit societal preferences between different treatment provision options, or to examine societal viewpoints in relation to the principles or practices of priority setting but there is little guidance on what to do when findings indicate substantial disagreement. Drawing on a body of empirical research, and focussing specifically on work funded by the MRC Methodology Panel to investigate societal viewpoints on the subject of NHS provision of life-extending technologies for terminally ill patients, Rachel will illustrate and discuss plurality in societal perspectives.
Assuming that ‘the public’ will almost always present a number of competing perspectives – both in terms of allegiances with different high-level principles and with respect to specific priority setting questions – how should researchers and policy makers respond? Rachel will raise questions for future research in relation to plurality in societal values and consistency, coherence and consensus.
Rachel Baker is Professor of Health Economics and Director of the Yunus Centre for Social Business and Health at Glasgow Caledonian University. Before moving to Glasgow in 2010, she worked at the University of Newcastle where she completed her PhD funded by the Medical Research Council (MRC) and her Postdoctoral Fellowship funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC). Rachel’s research interests focus on societal values with respect to health care resource allocation and understanding choice. She was involved in the UK Social Value of a QALY and European Value of a QALY projects and has expertise in Q methodology and qualitative methods as well as health economic approaches to valuation and preference elicitation. With funding from the MRC Methodology Panel, from 2011-2014, Rachel led research to explore societal perspectives on the relative value of life-extending treatments for people with terminal illnesses. She is Past President of the International Q methodology Society.
Assuming that ‘the public’ will almost always present a number of competing perspectives – both in terms of allegiances with different high-level principles and with respect to specific priority setting questions – how should researchers and policy makers respond? Rachel will raise questions for future research in relation to plurality in societal values and consistency, coherence and consensus.
Rachel Baker is Professor of Health Economics and Director of the Yunus Centre for Social Business and Health at Glasgow Caledonian University. Before moving to Glasgow in 2010, she worked at the University of Newcastle where she completed her PhD funded by the Medical Research Council (MRC) and her Postdoctoral Fellowship funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC). Rachel’s research interests focus on societal values with respect to health care resource allocation and understanding choice. She was involved in the UK Social Value of a QALY and European Value of a QALY projects and has expertise in Q methodology and qualitative methods as well as health economic approaches to valuation and preference elicitation. With funding from the MRC Methodology Panel, from 2011-2014, Rachel led research to explore societal perspectives on the relative value of life-extending treatments for people with terminal illnesses. She is Past President of the International Q methodology Society.