By integrating an ethically based account of health care priority setting (accountability for reasonableness) with an empirically based one (diamond model) as described below, we have engaged in a transdisciplinary effort.
She approached the job like a business executive: she courted philanthropists, set accountability measures, and created performance objectives that were more rigorous than those required by No Child Left Behind, which became law in 2002.
To do that, we set accountability standards at the lowest denominator.
A coach is also a partner in setting goals, mapping the way to accomplish them and setting accountability checkpoints.
This involved setting "accountability priorities" ([ 65]; General).
The intervention being applied is an explicit ethical framework for legitimate and fair priority setting, accountability for reasonableness (AFR).
Various authors have found this to have negative implications in terms of agenda setting, accountability, transparency and reporting (6, 16– 16).
Especially in London, the content, lifespan and negotiation process of job contracts were reported to affect staff's job security, job description, job location, priority setting, accountability and professional development.
We continue by proposing an alternative approach based on the combination of two innovative and increasingly important frameworks for health care priority setting: accountability for reasonableness (A4R) to foster fair priority setting processes, and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to foster rational priority setting.
The approach integrates two increasingly important frameworks on health care priority setting: accountability for reasonableness (A4R) to foster procedural fairness, and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to construct an evidence-base on the feasibility, efficiency, and equity of programme options including trade-offs.
