The phrase "approaches for priority" is not entirely clear and may not be the best choice in written English.
It could be used in contexts where you are discussing methods or strategies that should be prioritized, but the phrasing is awkward.
Example: "We need to identify the best approaches for priority in our project planning to ensure timely delivery."
Alternatives: "methods for prioritization" or "strategies for priority".
Different approaches for priority setting in PHC have been proposed [ 6- 8].
Approaches for priority setting and for weighting the different domains and statements are currently under development.
Since 1999, various pragmatic approaches for priority setting have been developed including the Combined Approach Matrix (CAM), which advocates for a transparent, iterative, equity-oriented, multidisciplinary approach involving all relevant stakeholders [ 21].
But NIH Principal Deputy Director Lawrence Tabak, who has headed the planning effort, insisted that document lays out a common approach for priority setting across all NIH's components.
The tool could be used as part of the integrated MCDA and accountability for reasonableness (A4R) approach for priority setting, recently proposed by Baltussen et al. [ 16].
However, the link that has not been made clearly in the literature is that HTA activity should feed directly into a formal approach for priority setting at the local or regional level.
We recommend making the tool part of the integrated MCDA A4R approach for priority setting in health as proposed by Baltussen et al. [ 16], however local capacity should be present or established to facilitate such a complete process.
The priority setting team could also provide education on the economics and ethics behind priority setting, and might be expected to map out medium range plans for systematic roll out of a PBMA-like approach for priority setting both within and across program areas.
Also, we observed that the group of policy makers and VHVs - although not PLWHA respondents - applauded the systematic approach for priority setting, including the development of relevant criteria, the presentation of the performance of interventions against these criteria, and the deliberative process.
Meanwhile, methodological development of approaches for analysing priorities for public health preparedness activities and tools for facilitating cross-sectoral collaboration were recently highlighted by participants representing more than 30 countries at a Joint ECDC-WHO Consultation on Pandemic and All-Hazard Preparedness, held in November, 2013.
The types of changes that may be needed at the national level can be divided into several categories: (1) management at appropriate scales, and not necessarily the scales of convenience or tradition; (2) increased collaboration among agencies; (3) rational approaches for establishing priorities and applying triage; and (4) management with expectation of ecosystem change.
