Assessing quality in cross-country comparisons of health systems and policies: Towards a set of generic quality criteria
Research output: Journal contributions › Journal articles › Research › peer-review
Standard
In: Health Policy, Vol. 112, No. 1-2, 09.2013, p. 156-162.
Research output: Journal contributions › Journal articles › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Assessing quality in cross-country comparisons of health systems and policies
T2 - Towards a set of generic quality criteria
AU - Cacace, Mirella
AU - Ettelt, Stefanie
AU - Mays, Nicholas
AU - Nolte, Ellen
PY - 2013/9
Y1 - 2013/9
N2 - There is a growing body of cross-country comparisons in health systems and policy research. However, there is little consensus as to how to assess its quality. This is partly due to the fact that cross-country comparison constitutes a diverse inter-disciplinary field of study, with much variation in the motives for research, foci and levels of analyses, and methodological approaches.Inspired by the views of subject area experts and using the distinction between variable-based and case-based research, we briefly review the main different types of cross-country comparisons in health systems and policy research to identify pertinent quality issues.From this, we identify the following generic quality criteria for cross-country comparisons: (1) appropriate use of theory, (2) explicit selection of comparator countries, (3) rigour of the comparative design, (4) attention to the complexity of cross-national comparison, (5) rigour of the research methods, and (6) contribution to knowledge. This list may not be exclusive though publication and discussion of the list of criteria should help raise awareness in this field of what constitutes high quality research. In turn, this should be helpful for those planning, undertaking, or commissioning cross-country comparative research.
AB - There is a growing body of cross-country comparisons in health systems and policy research. However, there is little consensus as to how to assess its quality. This is partly due to the fact that cross-country comparison constitutes a diverse inter-disciplinary field of study, with much variation in the motives for research, foci and levels of analyses, and methodological approaches.Inspired by the views of subject area experts and using the distinction between variable-based and case-based research, we briefly review the main different types of cross-country comparisons in health systems and policy research to identify pertinent quality issues.From this, we identify the following generic quality criteria for cross-country comparisons: (1) appropriate use of theory, (2) explicit selection of comparator countries, (3) rigour of the comparative design, (4) attention to the complexity of cross-national comparison, (5) rigour of the research methods, and (6) contribution to knowledge. This list may not be exclusive though publication and discussion of the list of criteria should help raise awareness in this field of what constitutes high quality research. In turn, this should be helpful for those planning, undertaking, or commissioning cross-country comparative research.
KW - Economics
KW - Case-oriented design
KW - Comparative method
KW - Cross-country comparisons
KW - Health policy research
KW - Health system research
KW - International comparisons
KW - Research quality criteria
KW - Variable-oriented design
KW - Health sciences
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84885189420&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.03.020
DO - 10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.03.020
M3 - Journal articles
C2 - 23628482
VL - 112
SP - 156
EP - 162
JO - Health Policy
JF - Health Policy
SN - 0168-8510
IS - 1-2
ER -