Cristin-prosjekt-ID: 676941
Sist endret: 3. oktober 2019 12:12

Cristin-prosjekt-ID: 676941
Sist endret: 3. oktober 2019 12:12
Prosjekt

Inclusive evaluation of public health interventions

prosjektleder

Ole Frithjof Norheim
ved Universitetet i Bergen

prosjekteier / koordinerende forskningsansvarlig enhet

  • Universitetet i Bergen

Finansiering

  • Norges forskningsråd
    Prosjektkode: 260588

Klassifisering

Vitenskapsdisipliner

Medisinske fag

Kategorier

Prosjektkategori

  • Grunnforskning

Tidsramme

Aktivt
Start: 1. januar 2017 Slutt: 31. august 2021

Beskrivelse Beskrivelse

Tittel

Inclusive evaluation of public health interventions

Populærvitenskapelig sammendrag

Public health interventions (PHIs) are critical for tackling many of Norway's and the world's greatest health challenges. In addition to the historical strides public health has made for reducing the spread of infectious diseases, there is hope that with further investments in PHIs the burden of chronic illnesses and health inequalities can also be reduced. Research has demonstrated that many PHIs have good value for money and that in the long term they can help contain health care costs for society. In parallel, there is a growing body of evidence demonstrating that policies in non-health sectors can have an even greater impact on population health than policies initiated within the health sector. Yet to this day, PHIs remain largely underfunded and under-prioritized when compared to clinical interventions.
 
Rigorous evaluation of PHIs is indispensable for ensuring that they are properly prioritized. A lack of available data, methodological shortcomings and a weak evidence base are commonly stated reasons for the difficulties arising at the time of evaluation. Further, previous evaluations of PHIs have often been narrow: omitting costs, benefits beyond health, and impact on inequalities. Interventions promoting physical activity are among the PHIs for which we need more evidence. The lack of reliable evidence ultimately can lead to PHIs being overlooked by decision-makers. However, it has been argued that today's process for evaluation tends to be the largest impediment. It is described as fragmented and poorly linked to the policy-making process, and even jeopardizing the implementation of favorably-evaluated PHIs.

A large majority of countries have formalized procedures for systematically compiling evidence and synthesizing information to support decisions for the introduction of new medical technologies in the clinical sector and for market authorization and reimbursement of new pharmaceuticals. However, an equivalent process for public health interventions (PHIs) does not always exists. Health commentators have called for expanding the use of such processes and health technology assessments (HTAs) to inform decision-making in public health.

The objective of this project is to generate new tools and evidence to promote PHIs that are cost-effective, that generate both health and non-health benefits, and that reduce inequalities. The project with also aim to investigate and compare the experience of countries that have used HTA processes to evaluate PHIs and to learn from their experience, institution designs and their evaluation and decision-making processes.

Specifically, we will: I) further develop newly proposed methods for inclusive evaluation of PHIs, i.e. economic evaluation that incorporates non-health benefits and distributional concerns; II) evaluate three clusters of PHIs promoting a) walking and cycling, b) lifestyle services for overweight or obese children, adolescents, and adults, and c) physical activity among socioeconomically disadvantaged women using the new methods; and III) identify previous work done to evaluate PHIs, assess what can be learned from those who have experience evaluating PHIs both on a local and national level and assess new ways to bridge the evaluation and decision-making frameworks for PHIs.

The project will help improve the evaluation and implementation of PHIs, and PHIs promoting physical activity in particular. The findings are directly relevant for municipalities, national authorities, and a wide range of other stakeholders.

Metode

The research project will employ a mix of both quantitative and qualitative methods, including method development (subproject I), cost-effectiveness analysis (subproject II), and scoping reviews, comparative policy analysis and interviews (subproject III). We will utilize data from multiple sources, including health surveys, the national burden of disease project and health technology assessment agencies' databases. 

prosjektdeltakere

prosjektleder

Ole Frithjof Norheim

  • Tilknyttet:
    Prosjektleder
    ved Universitetet i Bergen

Trygve Ottersen

  • Tilknyttet:
    Prosjektdeltaker
    ved Folkehelseinstituttet

Pascale-Renée Cyr

  • Tilknyttet:
    Prosjektdeltaker
    ved Universitetet i Oslo

Admassu Nadew Lamu

  • Tilknyttet:
    Prosjektdeltaker
    ved Universitetet i Bergen

Stéphane Verguet

  • Tilknyttet:
    Prosjektdeltaker
    ved Harvard School of Public Health
1 - 5 av 7 | Neste | Siste »

Resultater Resultater

Prioritering mellom folkehelsetiltak.

Norheim, Ole Frithjof. 2018, Åpent seminar med gjesteforeleser John Magnussen. UIBVitenskapelig foredrag

Inkluderende evaluering av folkehelsetiltak.

Norheim, Ole Frithjof. 2018, Prekonferanse til Folkehelsekonferansen 2018. UIBVitenskapelig foredrag

Prioritering og folkehelse.

Norheim, Ole Frithjof. 2018, Seminar for folkehelseavdelingen i Helse- og omsorgsdepartementet. UIBVitenskapelig foredrag

Hva er folkehelse?

Norheim, Ole Frithjof. 2018, Dagens medisin. UIBKronikk
1 - 5 av 5