| 引用本文：胡献之,陈英耀,梁斐,等.从咨询专家角度分析公立医疗机构公益性评价的共识与分歧[J].中国卫生政策研究,2012,5(11):37-41 |
|
| 从咨询专家角度分析公立医疗机构公益性评价的共识与分歧 |
| 投稿时间：2012-08-17 修订日期：2012-09-03 PDF全文浏览 HTML全文浏览 |
| 胡献之1, 陈英耀1, 梁斐1, 谷茜1, 刘文彬2, 柯雄3, 邓伟1, 赵列宾4, 庞伟明5 |
| 1.复旦大学公共卫生学院卫生部卫生技术评估重点实验室;2.复旦大学公共卫生学院卫生部卫生技术评估重点实验室，福建医科大学公共卫生学院;3.复旦大学公共卫生学院卫生部卫生技术评估重点实验室，川北医学院人文社科学院;4.上海交通大学医学院;5.加拿大劳伦森 大学乡镇和背部卫生服务研究所，北安大略省医学院 |
| 摘要:目的:分析不同背景的专家对于公立医疗机构公益性评价的共识和存在的分歧。方法：对大学科研机构研究者、卫生行政部门管理者、医院管理者和社会团体与患者代表共29名专家进行咨询。结果：不同类型专家对于公益性是公平可及优先还是质量优先存在争议，对于少数二级指标的权重选择也存在不同意见。结论：减少和消除政府、公立医疗机构以及患者对于公益性的认识差异，并明确各方责任有助于公立医疗机构公益性的提高和改善。 |
| 关键词:德尔菲法 公立医疗机构 公益性 评价 |
| 基金项目:国家自然科学基金（70973025） |
|
| Consensus and disagreement of evaluating public interest of public medical institutions from the point of view of the consultant |
|
|
| Abstract:Objective: To analyze consensus and differences of evaluating public interest of public medical institutions from the point of view of the consultants who are in various backgrounds Methods: Consulting to 29 experts including researchers from universities and research institutions, health officials, public hospital administrators and social groups representative and patients Result: Different experts hold different opinions on giving priority to fairness and accessibility or quality priority when evaluating public interest of public medical institutions, there are also different views by few conclutants on secondary indicators weight Conclusion： Improving and enhancing public interest of public medical institutions lies on reducing and eliminating the cognitive differences of public interest within government, public medical institutions and patients, as well as ensuring responsibilities of the parties |
| Key words:Delphi Public medical institution Public interest Evaluation |
| 摘要点击次数: 2754 全文下载次数: 2645 |
|
|
