Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Health care priority setting in Norway a multicriteria decision analysis

By Thierry Defechereux, Francesco Paolucci, Andrew Mirelman, Sitaporn Youngkong, Grete Botten, Terje Hagen and Louis Niessen


Background\ud Priority setting in population health is increasingly based on explicitly formulated values. The Patients Rights Act of the Norwegian tax-based health service guaranties all citizens health care in case of a severe illness, a proven health benefit, and proportionality between need and treatment. This study compares the values of the country's health policy makers with these three official principles.\ud \ud Methods\ud In total 34 policy makers participated in a discrete choice experiment, weighting the relative value of six policy criteria. We used multi-variate logistic regression with selection as dependent valuable to derive odds ratios for each criterion. Next, we constructed a composite league table - based on the sum score for the probability of selection - to rank potential interventions in five major disease areas.\ud \ud Results\ud The group considered cost effectiveness, large individual benefits and severity of disease as the most important criteria in decision making. Priority interventions are those related to cardiovascular diseases and respiratory diseases. Less attractive interventions rank those related to mental health.\ud \ud Conclusions\ud Norwegian policy makers' values are in agreement with principles formulated in national health laws. Multi-criteria decision approaches may provide a tool to support explicit allocation decisions

Topics: A900, R600
Publisher: BioMed Central
Year: 2012
OAI identifier:

Suggested articles


  1. (2009). Baltussen: Setting priorities for health interventions in developing countries: a review of empirical studies. Trop Med Int Health doi
  2. (2000). FF: The evidence-based approach in health policy and health care delivery. Soc Sci Med
  3. (2012). Gerard: Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Health Econ doi
  4. (2006). LN: Priority setting of health interventions: the need for multi-criteria decision analysis. Cost Effectiveness Resource Allocation (CERA) doi
  5. (2008). LS: Is the value of a life or life-year saved context specific? Further evidence from a discrete choice experiment. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation(CERA) doi
  6. (2007). Priority setting for health technology assessments: a systematic review of current practical approaches. Int J Technol Assess Health Care doi
  7. (2010). Ruth Saxby: Health system choice-a pilot discrete-choice experiment eliciting the preferences of British and Australian citizens. Appl Health Econ Health Policy doi
  8. (2006). Using economics to set pragmatic and ethical priorities. BMJ doi
  9. Uyl-de Groot Carin A, Bridges John, Niessen Louis W: Incorporating equity-efficiency interactions in cost-effectiveness doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.