Search results

This study aims to investigate the effect of psychological characteristics, including perfectionism, transcendental future and lifelong learning, on auditors’ cultural values and social health. It answers whether psychological characteristics can improve auditors’ cultural and social health values in Iraqi auditing firms.

Using the Cochran sampling method, 198 auditors were selected as the sample size. The effect of independent variables on the dependent variable has been investigated using partial least squares tests.

The results show a positive and significant relationship between perfectionism and improving cultural values of auditors. Moreover, the evidence indicates that the transcendental future positively impacts and enhances cultural and social health values by preventing and motivating criminal and lawful activities.

No research has been done on the impact of psychological characteristics on auditors’ cultural values and social health in Iraq. Therefore, this research will have helpful information and help develop knowledge in this field.

This editorial aims to outline the context of healthcare priority‐setting, and summarise each of the other ten papers in this special edition. It introduces a new multidisciplinary research programme drawing on ethics, philosophy, health economics, political science and health technology assessment, out of which the papers in this edition have arisen.

Key normative concepts are introduced and policy and research context provided to frame subsequent papers in the edition.

Common challenges of health priority‐setting are faced by many countries across the world, and a range of social value judgments is in play as resource allocation decisions are made. Although the challenges faced by different countries are in many ways similar, the way in which social values affect the processes and content of priority‐setting decisions means that those challenges are resolved very differently in a variety of social, political, cultural and institutional settings, as subsequent papers in this edition demonstrate. How social values affect decision making in this way is the subject of a new multi‐disciplinary research programme.

Technical analyses of health priority setting are commonplace, but approaching the issues from the perspective of social values and conducting comparative analyses across countries with very different cultural, social and institutional contexts provides the content for a new research agenda.

It is commonly recognized that the setting of health priorities requires value judgements and that these judgements are social. Justifying social value judgements is an important element in any public justification of how priorities are set. The purpose of this paper is to review a number of social values relating both to the process and content of priority‐setting decisions.

A set of key process and content values basic to health priority setting is outlined, and normative analysis applied to those values to identify their key features, possible interpretations in different cultural and institutional contexts, and interactions with other values.

Process values are found to be closely linked, such that success in increasing, for example, transparency may depend on increasing participation or accountability, and “content” values are found often to be hidden in technical criteria. There is a complex interplay between value and technical components of priority setting, and between process and content values. Levels of economic development, culture and need will all play a part in determining how different systems balance the values in their decisions.

Technical analyses of health priority setting are commonplace, but approaching the issues from the perspective of social values is a more recent approach and one which this paper seeks to refine and develop.

The purpose of this paper is to consider some of the philosophical and bioethical issues raised by the creation of the draft social values framework developed to facilitate data collection and country‐specific presentations at the inaugural workshop on “Social values and health priority setting” held in February 2011.

Conceptual analysis is used to analyse the term “social values”, as employed in the framework, and its relationship to related ideas such as moral values. The structure of the framework (process and content values) is considered in light of current debate in philosophy and bioethics about the political and moral aims served by these kinds of values, and the extent to which they are either suited to, or sufficient for, the policy context.

There is much to be gained by engaging with the arguments presented in the philosophical literature in order to further refine the framework. The framework should remain neutral in respect of the importance of procedural values in different contexts and should be as inclusive as possible in respect of the principles it includes. Further development would be best served by taking a multidisciplinary approach. The framework could provide a valuable space in which future debates about procedural/substantive values can be considered.

The paper brings philosophical and bioethics perspectives to bear on a new framework proposed for the analysis of social values in health priority setting. It identifies how such a practical, policy‐focused framework might be informed by engagement with deeper, and often unresolved, questions or principle around resource allocation in health.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of health priority setting structures in Germany. It reflects on how and which social values may influence decision making, and in particular investigates the role of the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) in integrating evidence‐based decision making into the German system.

The paper applies Clark and Weale's framework of analysis for Social Values and Health Priority Setting to the German context. Placing German health care decision making into Clark and Weale's framework allows for an analysis of the role and content of social values in different dimensions of decision making.

Germany has witnessed significant changes in its health care decision‐making procedures in recent decades. The establishment of the Institute of Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) represents an effort to introduce health technology assessment (HTA) as a formal element of decision making in health care. In doing so, Germany has made unique methodological and structural choices that reflect the social values and institutional traditions that underpin its self‐governing statutory health insurance (SHI) system. The empirical evidence suggests that the principle of solidarity is upheld as a core value in health priority setting in Germany.

The German case of health priority setting highlights some of the challenges involved when introducing centralised HTA structures to a self‐governing SHI system. As such, this paper contributes to an understanding of the different forms that HTA can take, what social values they embody and how they can affect health priority setting in different ways.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the roles of social values in the reform of coverage decisions for Thailand's Universal Health Coverage (UC) plan in 2009 and 2010.

Qualitative techniques, including document review and personal communication, were employed for data collection and triangulation. All relevant data and information regarding the reform and three case study interventions were interpreted and analysed according to the thematic elements in the conceptual framework.

Social values determined changes in the UC plan in two steps: the development of coverage decision guidelines and the introduction of such guidelines in benefit package formulation. The former was guided by process values, while the latter was shaped by different content ideals of stakeholders and policymakers. Analysis of the three interventions suggests that in allocating its resources to subsidise particular services, the UC authority took into account not only cost‐effectiveness, but also budget impacts, equity and solidarity. These social values competed with each other and, in many instances, the prioritisation of benefit candidates was not led solely by evidence, but also by value judgments, even though transparency was recognised as an ultimate goal of reform.

The study findings indicate room for improvement and for future research – the current conceptual framework is inadequate to capture all the crucial elements which influence health prioritisation, as well as their interactions with social values.

The paper fills a gap in literature as it enhances understanding of the effects of social value judgments in real‐life health prioritisation.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that the social values framework developed by Clark and Weale could be applied to publicly available data and to explore the concordance between the framework values and those present in the statements of decision‐making protocols of Health Technology Assessment Agencies.

The web sites of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE); the All Wales Strategy Medicines Group; and the Scottish Medicines Consortium were searched for references to social value statements and assessed according to the social values framework.

The framework was easy to apply and demonstrated that it is possible to find statements of operational expression of a range of social values in the description of the decision protocols used by the public agencies. Most of the framework's values find some expression in the statements of the decision protocols, but there are differences. For example, the All Wales Group, when discussing clinical effectiveness, explicitly refers to an assessment via “pathways of care” in a way that neither of the other two do. The value of autonomy is explicitly mentioned by NICE but not by the other two, whereas the value of solidarity (a value most typically associated with European social insurance systems) finds only indirect expression in the guidance notes of all.

The paper provides further information that will be useful in revising the framework in preparation for its role in future data collection.

This is the initial step in developing a social values instrument that will support health policy decisions. While there are other check lists of social values, this is the first time that an approach to creating a framework is being tested empirically.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the organisational and procedural arrangements for healthcare reform in China, and describe the role of social values in the relevant decision‐making process.

An analysis of recent developments aimed at achieving universal coverage in China was undertaken in the context of describing the influence of underlying social values.

The key underlying social value was found to be social solidarity. Other values were implicit rather than explicitly stated, and were subservient to the overall aim of comprehensive coverage.

The paper shows that China is embarking on the largest‐scale health reforms in the world. There is an eagerness to share experiences with other countries in an attempt to ensure the success of the reforms. There is an increasing understanding of the need to make the values underpinning the reforms more explicit and, in particular, those concerned with efficiency and appropriateness.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the organisational and procedural arrangements for priority setting in England and Wales. It describes the role of social values in the decision‐making process.

The processes and content of decisions made by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence are analysed using the framework developed by Clark and Weale for identifying social values in health priority‐setting.

While countries are seeking to achieve similar outcomes from their health prioritisation processes, each country has established different systems that reflect the social and legal framework underpinning their health systems. England is somewhat unique in being explicit about assessing “value for money” and using formal cost‐effectiveness in developing policy.

Many countries are now considering the use of formal health economic methodologies to assess the value and prioritise health care interventions. However there is increasing recognition of the importance of values other than efficiency (cost effectiveness) in making acceptable decisions. This is manifest in the range of potential new approaches being developed including multiple criteria decision analysis.

This study has two main purposes. First, the effects of health anxiety and perceived social value on the intention to consume functional food were examined. Second, the role of health knowledge levels in these relationships was identified.

The sample consisted of 271 restaurant consumers on the European side of Istanbul between August and October 2021. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was used to test the research model.

Restaurant consumers revealed that health anxiety and perceived social value positively affect functional food consumption intentions. Moreover, health knowledge levels have a negative moderating effect on the relationship between health anxiety and functional food consumption intentions.

Thanks to the findings of this study, the roles of health anxiety, perceived social value and health knowledge in functional food consumption were determined, thus filling a vital literature gap.