Get access

Q-ING FOR HEALTH—A NEW APPROACH TO ELICITING THE PUBLIC'S VIEWS ON HEALTH CARE RESOURCE ALLOCATION

Authors


  • On behalf of The SVQ study team:
  • Rachel Baker1, Ian Bateman3, Cam Donaldson1, Michael Jones-Lee2, Emily Lancsar2, Graham Loomes4, Helen Mason1, Jose Luis Pinto Prades5, Angela Robinson3, Mandy Ryan6, Phil Shackley7, Richard Smith8, Kerry Sproston9, Robert Sugden3, Heather Wardle9, John Wildman2
  • Glasgow Caledonian University1, Newcastle University2, University of East Anglia3, University of Warwick4, University Pablo de Olivade5, University Aberdeen6, University of Sheffield7, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine8, National Centre for Social Research (NatCen)9
  • Although at the time this research was conducted, there were no requirements for formal ethical committee approval, the research was conducted according to the procedures required by Newcastle University Research Ethics Committee.

ABSTRACT

The elicitation of societal views about healthcare priority setting is an important, contemporary research area, and there are a number of studies that apply either qualitative techniques or quantitative preference elicitation methods. However, there are methodological challenges in connecting qualitative information (what perspectives exist about a subject) with quantitative questions (to what extent are those perspectives ‘supported’ in a wider population). In this paper, we present an integrated, mixed-methods approach to the elicitation of public perspectives in two linked studies applying Q methodology. In the first study, we identify three broad viewpoints on the subject of health priorities. In the second study, using Q-survey methods, we describe and illustrate methods to investigate the distribution of those views in the wider population. The findings of the second study suggest that no single viewpoint dominates and none of the three views represents a ‘minority perspective’. We demonstrate the potential of Q methodology as a methodological framework that can be used to link qualitative and quantitative questions and suggest some advantages of this over other approaches. However, as this represents the first applied study of this kind, there are methodological questions that require further exploration and development. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Get access to the full text of this article

Ancillary