SUB-THEMES

 

Topics to be discussed fall under three main sub-themes, with a focus on organizing priority setting, using priority setting in UHC decisions, and practical experiences of priority setting. The three sub-themes are interrelated and may somewhat overlap, thus, the issues in each sub-theme may be similar, but with different perspectives depending on the sub-theme.


SUB-THEME 1: Organizing priority setting: what evidence is needed?


Various tools are available to support priority setting; some are well established and widely used, others are emerging and under development. Moreover, some analytical methods, such as economic evaluation, comprise different approaches, e.g. generalized cost-effectiveness analysis, extended cost-effectiveness analysis, etc. Notably, there is not a single tool that addresses all priority setting concerns among decision makers and stakeholders. The effectiveness of a tool depends on the objective and context of use. This sub-theme provides not only basic information to participants who are not familiar with priority setting and its technical terms, but also, in some sessions, offers in-depth dialogues on current challenges in order to call for collaborations in order to address these challenges in the future.


Objectives


1. To overview techniques and approaches available for priority setting including their advantages and disadvantages
2. To discuss what evidence is required in priority setting for the whole range of interventions from single technologies to complex interventions, health systems arrangements, and disinvestment of existing interventions/technologies
3. To discuss the governance of priority setting


SUB-THEME 2: Using priority setting evidence in making UHC decisions


The main objective of this sub-theme is to demonstrate political economy and options to link evidence to UHC policy. This sub-theme also addresses current challenges in this area, including the lack of integration of evidence in policy development, such as the revision of the benefits package, national formularies, standard practice guidelines, and designs of public health programs.


Objectives


1. To discuss political economy of priority setting for UHC, including why decision makers do or do not use evidence in decision making 
2. To address how evidence is applied, transcendent across geographical boundaries, and communicated in UHC decisions in different country contexts


SUB-THEME 3: Priority setting in action: learning and sharing country experiences


This sub-theme covers real world experiences by development partners and countries where priority setting mechanisms exist or HITA studies have been conducted, as well as countries without formal mechanisms. The sub-theme offers an opportunity for learning and sharing country experiences with different levels of development towards UHC and priority setting capacities, and the role of development partners in these countries. It will also discuss missed opportunities of countries without explicit health priority setting. The sub-theme will lead to policy and practical recommendations for the establishment or maintenance of priority setting mechanisms for the sustainability of UHC.


Objectives


1. To learn and share experiences on priority setting for UHC in different country contexts 
2. To develop policy recommendations for establishing or maintaining priority setting mechanisms for UHC