Abstract
In the deliberations of a health planning body, there is a constant need for setting priorities as to which problems are to be studied, which interventions are to be implemented, and which of various project proposals are to be approved. An attempt is made to provide criteria which reflect concerns from four sets of viewpoints. Technologic concerns, health concerns, general social concerns, and planning concerns are each accorded a battery of possible criteria; and the logic of weighting and then rating competing problems, interventions, or projects against these weighted criteria is developed. It is concluded that this is a practical, even if simplistic tool, and that it provides an excellent vehicle for educating and bringing planning boards to an appreciation of the complexities of priority–setting, and it is shown that much more is involved than a traditional cost–benefit approach.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.