The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Understanding and using patient experiences as evidence in healthcare priority setting

Understanding and using patient experiences as evidence in healthcare priority setting
Understanding and using patient experiences as evidence in healthcare priority setting

BACKGROUND: In many countries, committees make priority-setting decisions in order to control healthcare costs. These decisions take into account relevant criteria, including clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and need, and are supported by evidence usually drawn from clinical and economic studies. These sources of evidence do not include the specific perspective and information that patients can provide about the condition and treatment.

METHODS: Drawing on arguments from political philosophy and ethics that are the ethical basis for many priority-setting bodies, the authors argue that criteria like need and its effects on patients and caregivers are best supported by evidence generated from patients' experiences. Social sciences and mixed-methods research support the generation and collection of robust evidence.

RESULTS: Patient experience is required for a decision-making process that considers all relevant evidence. For fair priority-setting, decision-makers should consider relevant evidence and reasons, so patient experience evidence should not be ignored. Patient experience must be gathered in a way that generates high quality and methodologically rigorous evidence. Established quantitative and qualitative methods can assure that evidence is systematic, adherent to quality standards, and valid. Patient, like clinical, evidence should be subject to a transparent review process.

DISCUSSION: Considering all relevant evidence gives each person an equal opportunity at having their treatment funded. Patient experience gives context to the clinical evidence and also directly informs our understanding of the nature of the condition and its effects, including patients' needs, how to meet them, and the burden of illness. Such evidence also serves to contextualise reported effects of the treatment. The requirement to include patient experience as evidence has important policy implications for bodies that make priority-setting decisions since it proposes that new types of evidence reviews are commissioned and considered.

1478-7547
20
Rand, Leah
3f7c9682-6152-4679-91a4-8b8ebc2f7c89
Dunn, Michael
546c0831-42b9-4949-96d8-11ab6f1e9fb9
Slade, Ingrid
264e62f4-7c1e-4522-93f2-917de23e31d3
Upadhyaya, Sheela
f45d08a7-198f-408a-88d3-075912d38266
Sheehan, Mark
9632179e-6115-49b3-8ce3-bd33722e9a7a
Rand, Leah
3f7c9682-6152-4679-91a4-8b8ebc2f7c89
Dunn, Michael
546c0831-42b9-4949-96d8-11ab6f1e9fb9
Slade, Ingrid
264e62f4-7c1e-4522-93f2-917de23e31d3
Upadhyaya, Sheela
f45d08a7-198f-408a-88d3-075912d38266
Sheehan, Mark
9632179e-6115-49b3-8ce3-bd33722e9a7a

Rand, Leah, Dunn, Michael, Slade, Ingrid, Upadhyaya, Sheela and Sheehan, Mark (2019) Understanding and using patient experiences as evidence in healthcare priority setting. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 17, 20. (doi:10.1186/s12962-019-0188-1).

Record type: Article

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In many countries, committees make priority-setting decisions in order to control healthcare costs. These decisions take into account relevant criteria, including clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and need, and are supported by evidence usually drawn from clinical and economic studies. These sources of evidence do not include the specific perspective and information that patients can provide about the condition and treatment.

METHODS: Drawing on arguments from political philosophy and ethics that are the ethical basis for many priority-setting bodies, the authors argue that criteria like need and its effects on patients and caregivers are best supported by evidence generated from patients' experiences. Social sciences and mixed-methods research support the generation and collection of robust evidence.

RESULTS: Patient experience is required for a decision-making process that considers all relevant evidence. For fair priority-setting, decision-makers should consider relevant evidence and reasons, so patient experience evidence should not be ignored. Patient experience must be gathered in a way that generates high quality and methodologically rigorous evidence. Established quantitative and qualitative methods can assure that evidence is systematic, adherent to quality standards, and valid. Patient, like clinical, evidence should be subject to a transparent review process.

DISCUSSION: Considering all relevant evidence gives each person an equal opportunity at having their treatment funded. Patient experience gives context to the clinical evidence and also directly informs our understanding of the nature of the condition and its effects, including patients' needs, how to meet them, and the burden of illness. Such evidence also serves to contextualise reported effects of the treatment. The requirement to include patient experience as evidence has important policy implications for bodies that make priority-setting decisions since it proposes that new types of evidence reviews are commissioned and considered.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 23 September 2019
Additional Information: © The Author(s) 2019.

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 506563
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/506563
ISSN: 1478-7547
PURE UUID: 2d2530ef-1da0-4441-bb7a-3a5e7409c70f
ORCID for Ingrid Slade: ORCID iD orcid.org/0009-0005-4946-8688

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 11 Nov 2025 17:50
Last modified: 12 Nov 2025 03:09

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Leah Rand
Author: Michael Dunn
Author: Ingrid Slade ORCID iD
Author: Sheela Upadhyaya
Author: Mark Sheehan

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×