Multi-criteria decision analysis of breast cancer control in low- and middle- income countries : development of a rating tool for policy makers

Venhorst, Kristie and Zelle, Sten G. and Tromp, Noor and Lauer, Jeremy A. (2014) Multi-criteria decision analysis of breast cancer control in low- and middle- income countries : development of a rating tool for policy makers. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 12 (1). pp. 1-10. 13. (https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-7547-12-13)

[thumbnail of Venhorst-etal-CERA2014-Multi-criteria-decision-analysis-breast-cancer-control-low-middle-income-countries-development-rating-tool-policy-makers]
Preview
 Text. Filename: Venhorst_etal_CERA2014_Multi_criteria_decision_analysis_breast_cancer_control_low_middle_income_countries_development_rating_tool_policy_makers.pdf
Final Published Version
License: Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 logo
Download (1MB)| Preview

Abstract

Background: The objective of this study was to develop a rating tool for policy makers to prioritize breast cancer interventions in low- and middle- income countries (LMICs), based on a simple multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) approach. The definition and identification of criteria play a key role in MCDA, and our rating tool could be used as part of a broader priority setting exercise in a local setting. This tool may contribute to a more transparent priority-setting process and fairer decision-making in future breast cancer policy development.Methods: First, an expert panel (n = 5) discussed key considerations for tool development. A literature review followed to inventory all relevant criteria and construct an initial set of criteria. A Delphi study was then performed and questionnaires used to discuss a final list of criteria with clear definitions and potential scoring scales. For this Delphi study, multiple breast cancer policy and priority-setting experts from different LMICs were selected and invited by the World Health Organization. Fifteen international experts participated in all three Delphi rounds to assess and evaluate each criterion.Results: This study resulted in a preliminary rating tool for assessing breast cancer interventions in LMICs. The tool consists of 10 carefully crafted criteria (effectiveness, quality of the evidence, magnitude of individual health impact, acceptability, cost-effectiveness, technical complexity, affordability, safety, geographical coverage, and accessibility), with clear definitions and potential scoring scales.Conclusions: This study describes the development of a rating tool to assess breast cancer interventions in LMICs. Our tool can offer supporting knowledge for the use or development of rating tools as part of a broader (MCDA based) priority setting exercise in local settings. Further steps for improving the tool are proposed and should lead to its useful adoption in LMICs.

CORE (COnnecting REpositories)