Table 3.
Respondent rankings of criteria that should be applied to define research priorities on access to medicines *
| Items (proposed criteria) | Colombia | Dominican Republic | El Salvador | Suriname | E-mail survey | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| g |
Relevance (magnitude of the problem; persistence of the problem; impact on health; urgency) |
1.5 |
1.8 |
0.6 |
0.9 |
2.0 |
6.7 |
| b |
Feasibility (capacity of the system to carry out the research; funding support; justification of the cost/investment; justification of time) |
0.8 |
1.0 |
0.8 |
0.7 |
0.7 |
4.1 |
| i |
Research utilization (adequacy and usefulness of the current knowledge base (avoiding duplication); applicability of the research outcome; availability of cost-effective interventions (access); operational effectiveness) |
1.0 |
0.3 |
0.5 |
1.1 |
1.0 |
3.9 |
| f |
Political will/acceptability/commitment |
0.5 |
1.1 |
0.9 |
0.8 |
0.5 |
3.8 |
| c |
Human rights issues; equity focus; ethical and moral issues |
0.7 |
1.3 |
0.9 |
0.3 |
0.6 |
3.7 |
| h |
Responsiveness to the National Health Policy or national goals |
0.7 |
0.8 |
0.4 |
0.8 |
1.0 |
3.6 |
| a |
Community concern/demand; environmental health and sociopolitical effects |
0.3 |
0.3 |
1.1 |
0.9 |
0.4 |
3.0 |
| d |
Impact on development; economic impact |
0.2 |
0.6 |
0.5 |
0.4 |
0.3 |
1.9 |
| e | Partnership building; research capacity building | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 1.0 |
*Item codes reflect the order in which they appeared in the questionnaire. Here they are presented according to total ranking scores. Bold numbers represent the three highest scores in each setting.
Source: Authors.