The Australian Government's Review of Positron Emission Tomography: evidence‐based policy decision‐making in action

2004 ◽  
Vol 181 (9) ◽  
pp. 516-517
Author(s):  
Robert E Ware ◽  
Hilton W Francis ◽  
Kenneth E Read
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Positron Emission Tomography ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Emission Tomography ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
Positron Emission ◽  
Policy Decision Making

A new epistemology of evidence-based policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 241-258
Author(s):  
Philip Sayer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Socially Constructed ◽  
Process Reliabilism ◽  
What Works ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
Short Period ◽  
Policy Decision Making

In a remarkably short period, ‘evidence-based policy’ (EBP), and the associated discourses of ‘what works’, have risen to prominence as a set of organising principles for public policy decision-making. Critics of EBP frequently point to its implicit positivist assumptions by highlighting the socially constructed nature of evidence. However, the effectiveness of this critique is limited by the imprecise and often pejorative use of the term ‘positivism’. This article therefore seeks to offer a more precise account of the underlying assumptions of EBP. To do so, it draws on an epistemological position known as process reliabilism, which analyses the justification of a belief by assessing whether it has been reached by means of an epistemically reliable decision-making process or processes. Through this framework, the article advocates a new approach to EBP which is framed around the principle of avoiding error, rather than that of seeking truth.

What prevents health policy being ‘evidence-based’? New ways to think about evidence, policy and interventions in health

2020 ◽  
Vol 135 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kari Lancaster ◽  
Tim Rhodes
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Science Literature ◽  
Policy Studies ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
Policy Decision Making ◽  
Dominant Paradigm

Abstract Background Evidence-based policy decision-making is a dominant paradigm in health but realizing this ideal has proven challenging. Sources of data This paper conceptually maps health policy, policy studies and social science literature critically engaged with evidence and decision-making. No new data were generated or analysed in support of this review. Areas of agreement Barriers to evidence-based policy have been documented, with efforts made to increase the uptake of evidence. Areas of controversy Evident complexities have been regarded as a problem of translation. However, this assumes that policy-making is a process of authoritative choice, and that ‘evidence’ is inherently valuable policy knowledge, which has been critiqued. Growing points Alternative accounts urge consideration of how evidence comes to bear on decisions made within complex systems, and what counts as evidence. Areas timely for developing research An ‘evidence-making intervention’ approach offers a framework for conceptualizing how evidence and interventions are made relationally in practices, thus working with the politics and contingencies of implementation and policy-making.

scholarly journals Chile’s National Advisory Committee on Immunization (CAVEI): Evidence-based recommendations for public policy decision-making on vaccines and immunization

Vaccine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (32) ◽  
pp. 4646-4650 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeannette Dabanch ◽  
Cecilia González ◽  
Jaime Cerda ◽  
Johanna Acevedo ◽  
Mario Calvo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Advisory Committee ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Policy Decision Making

Assessing short-term effects and costs at an early stage of innovation: The use of positron emission tomography on radiotherapy treatment decision making

2008 ◽  
Vol 24 (02) ◽  
pp. 212-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raphaël Remonnay ◽  
Magali Morelle ◽  
Pascal Pommier ◽  
Francesco Giammarile ◽  
Marie-Odile Carrère
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Positron Emission Tomography ◽  
Hodgkin's Disease ◽  
Hodgkin’S Disease ◽  
Emission Tomography ◽  
Positron Emission ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Mean Cost ◽  
Radiotherapy Treatment

Objectives:Positron emission tomography (PET) is an innovative imaging tool. Associated with computed tomography (CT), it allows a better definition for the tumor volume for radiotherapy, compared with CT only. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of PET on resource allocation (costs and savings) and on the choice of the following treatment in radiotherapy.Methods:In 2004 and 2005, 209 patients were enrolled (97 patients with Hodgkin's disease and 112 with non-small cell lung cancer) in a national study conducted in eight hospitals. Two treatment decisions made on the basis of CT only or CT associated with PET, were compared in a prospective study where each subject was his/her own control. The direct medical cost of using PET was assessed by microcosting, using data collected from specific questionnaires. The costs of new tests and the costs and savings associated with changes in the chosen treatment were calculated on the basis of reimbursement rates.Results:The mean cost of using PET was approximately €800 per patient (50 percent for the radionuclide18F-FDG [2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose]). Radiotherapy treatments were modified for 10 percent of patients with Hodgkin's disease versus 40 percent of patients with lung cancer. Overall, the use of PET induced both increases and decreases in the mean cost per patient: the net effect was a €425 and €931 cost increase in lung cancer and Hodgkin's disease, respectively.Conclusions:The use of PET for radiotherapy decision making seems more valuable for lung cancer than for Hodgkin's disease, both in terms of costs and changes in radiotherapy treatment. This result might help policy makers for prioritization.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document