Priority setting for non-communicable disease prevention - Co-producing a regulatory agenda informing novel codes of practice in Australia.


Journal

Social science & medicine (1982)
ISSN: 1873-5347
Titre abrégé: Soc Sci Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8303205

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
09 2023
Historique:
received: 21 08 2022
revised: 29 04 2023
accepted: 04 08 2023
medline: 7 9 2023
pubmed: 14 8 2023
entrez: 13 8 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

There are a range of priority setting methods for non-communicable disease (NCDs) prevention. However, existing methods are often designed without detailed consideration of local context and political economy- critical success factors for implementation. In Australia, codes of practice under state government Public Health Acts could be used for NCD prevention. To inform the potential development of codes of practice under Public Health Acts, this study aimed to co-create a priority setting framework that accounts for local context and the prevailing regulatory agenda. A priority setting framework was co-produced by a multidisciplinary technical advisory group consisting of government representatives, public health lawyers and academic experts. It incorporated general prioritisation criteria (evidence, cost-effectiveness, equity, burden of disease) and local contextual criteria (legal compatibility, unmet-needs, political acceptability, structural and technical feasibility, community support). The framework was then applied in practice through surveys and policy dialogue workshops to discuss political economy factors. Policies were limited to nutrition, alcohol and physical activity risk factors. Through the prioritisation process, the most impactful, feasible and acceptable policies for NCD prevention via state government codes of practice were: restrictions on in-store placement of unhealthy products, enhancing data systems and capabilities for health surveillance and implementation monitoring, removal of unhealthy foods and drinks sold and supplied in public institutions, prohibition of marketing of unhealthy foods and drinks on assets controlled by government, and implementation of subsidies or grants to increase fruit and vegetable intake. The process illustrated that explicit consideration of local context, legal compatibility and the political economy had a substantial influence on the prioritised list of actions. The proposed priority setting framework is designed to be flexible and adaptable to varying contexts, can be embedded in government processes or utilised by researchers and practitioners to co-produce a regulatory agenda that is locally relevant.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37573676
pii: S0277-9536(23)00506-3
doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116149
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

116149

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest None.

Auteurs

Maddie Heenan (M)

The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Level 5/ 1 King St, Newtown, NSW, 2042, Australia; Australian Human Rights Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia. Electronic address: mheenan@georgeinstitute.org.au.

Stephen Jan (S)

The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Level 5/ 1 King St, Newtown, NSW, 2042, Australia. Electronic address: sjan@georgeinstitute.org.au.

Martyn Ralph (M)

The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Level 5/ 1 King St, Newtown, NSW, 2042, Australia. Electronic address: martyntralph@gmail.com.

Gary Sacks (G)

Global Obesity Centre, Deakin University, Melbourne Burwood Campus, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia. Electronic address: gary.sacks@deakin.edu.au.

Boyd Swinburn (B)

School of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, 1010, New Zealand. Electronic address: boyd.swinburn@auckland.ac.nz.

Janani Shanthosh (J)

The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Level 5/ 1 King St, Newtown, NSW, 2042, Australia; Australian Human Rights Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia. Electronic address: jshanthosh@georgeinstitute.org.au.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH