The phrase "as a priority setting for" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing the importance or ranking of a particular issue or task in relation to others.
Example: "The committee established a new initiative as a priority setting for environmental sustainability in the upcoming year."
Alternatives: "as a key focus for" or "as a main objective for".
Six out of the eight external stakeholders identified poor leadership capacity of the MOH as an obstructing factor facing priority setting for MNDs and the development and implementation of related policy solutions, whereas only two of seven internal stakeholders raised this issue.
As part of a global exercise on priority setting for health policy and research on ATM in LMICs, coordinated by the Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research AHPSRR) [ 13], two studies involving Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) LMICs were carried out by researchers from the Sergio Arouca National School of Public Health, Brazil.
A population-based survey was conducted in 2007 as part of the 'REsponse to ACcountable priority setting for Trust in health systems' (REACT) project.
Similarly, the baseline study conducted as part of the Response to Accountable Priority Setting for Trust in health system (REACT) project intervention reported in this study revealed that while user committees and boards had been established in the district, they had little impact on the planning and priority-setting process (15– 15).
Litt et al. (2004) describe the approach used by the Pew Environmental Health Commission as a model for priority setting, including the availability of existing data as a useful criterion for setting priorities.
In one study, GPs described how they tried to make a rough estimate of cost-effectiveness to use as a basis for priority setting [ 27].
This is not a major drawback since the EHP was designed and costed by government as a tool for priority setting and to be funded by both government and partners through a SWAp.
Local evidence may also be useful as part of a process of priority-setting for the development of evidence-informed policy and programme options [ 4].
More specifically, beyond the general findings discussed above, this study highlighted at least three particularly challenging issues for prioritarianism in priority setting as well as for priority setting more generally.
