CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 42Health Services Management and PolicyPrimary Care and Health OutcomesHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

Better ways of assessing health needs in primary care

Open access
Shanks, John, Kheraj, Sadru, Fish, Sue·1995·BMJ
DOI 10.1136/bmj.310.6978.480PMC PMC2548869
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Commissioning authorities increasingly attempt to base their purchasing decisions on systematic, epidemiologically informed assessment of the health needs of their local populations. General practitioners as purchasers usually rely on their own judgment. No one knows which method works better, but a combined approach may capture some of the advantages of both. One of the more widely welcomed aspects of the NHS reforms was the requirement that health authorities' decisions on how to use NHS resources should in future be based on a systematic assessment of each local population's needs for health care. This is meant to take account of local demography, the epidemiology of health problems, evidence on the effectiveness of treatments, and the preferences of local people.1 Needs assessment has become an important task for public health doctors and others working in commissioning authorities. This more rational and scientific method is put forward as an improvement over the former approach to allocating health funding, caricatured as “same as last year, plus or minus five per cent for pressure groups.”2 The most obvious way in which general practitioners can shape decisions on the pattern of purchasing for hospital and community health services is by becoming fundholders. Non-fundholding general …

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.310.6978.480

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The study recruited subjects in both urban and rural settings through a two-stage community survey based on census registers and lists of patients registered with primary care doctors, methods which have equal validity in terms of reliability of data-sets.

    “The strengths of this paper include the recruitment of subjects in both urban and rural settings through a two-stage community survey, based on census registers and lists of patients registered with primary care doctorsmethods which have equal validity in terms of the reliability of the data-sets [15]”

    From The role of personality disorder in 'difficult to reach' patients with depression: Findings from the ODIN study (2007) · cites this paper as [15]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Shanks, J., Kheraj, S., & Fish, S.
ORCID
Shanks, John
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1995-02-25
Volume
310
Issue
6978
Pages
480-481
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
DOI
10.1136/bmj.310.6978.480
PMC
PMC2548869
OpenAlex
W1991374255
Cited by
42
References
6
Citations by year
2021: 1 · 2015: 1
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.bmj.com/company/legal-information/terms-conditions/legal-information/tdm-licencepolicy (tdm)
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Services Management and Policy
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
health needs assessment, primary care, commissioning, public health doctors, fundholding
MeSH terms
Delivery of Health Care, United Kingdom, Health Services Needs and Demand, Humans, Primary Health Care, State Medicine, Risk Assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review