Euro Surveill. Letter to the editor: Prioritisation of infectious diseases in public health: feedback on the prioritisation methodology, 15 July 2008 to 15 January 2009

[Giuseppe]

Re: Euro Surveill. Letter to the editor: Prioritisation of infectious diseases in public health: feedback on the prioritisation methodology, 15 July 2008 to 15 January 2009

[Source: Eurosurveillance, full text: (LINK). Extract, edited.]

Eurosurveillance, Volume 16, Issue 27, 07 July 2011
Letters
Authors? reply: Prioritisation of infectious diseases in public health: feedback on the prioritisation methodology, 15 July 2008 to 15 January 2009



A Gilsdorf ()<SUP>1</SUP>, G Krause<SUP>1</SUP>

1. Department for Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany

<HR>
Citation style for this article: Gilsdorf A, Krause G. Authors? reply: Prioritisation of infectious diseases in public health: feedback on the prioritisation methodology, 15 July 2008 to 15 January 2009. Euro Surveill. 2011;16(27):pii=19912. Available online: http://www.eurosurveillance.org/View...rticleId=19912
Date of submission: 05 July 2011 <HR>

To the editors:

We thank the authors of the letter in reply to our article ?Prioritisation of infectious diseases in public health: feedback on the prioritisation methodology, 15 July to 15 January 2009? for contributing to the discussion, that we initiated by launching the described feedback survey on the prioritisation methodology.
The points raised are mainly addressing concerns against the original prioritisation method, described in ?Prioritisation of infectious disease in public health ? call for comments? by Krause et al. in 2008. As mentioned in our article in 2011, the survey was launched in order to get outside expertise for improving the prioritisation methodology, as we were preparing a new round of prioritisation. (?)

- -------

[Giuseppe]

[Source: Eurosurveillance, full text: (LINK). Extract, edited.]

Eurosurveillance, Volume 16, Issue 27, 07 July 2011
Letters
Letter to the editor: Prioritisation of infectious diseases in public health: feedback on the prioritisation methodology, 15 July 2008 to 15 January 2009



V J Del Rio Vilas ()<SUP>1</SUP>, G Montibeller<SUP>2</SUP>, L A Franco<SUP>3</SUP>

1. Bechtel International Systems Inc. Tashkent, Uzbekistan
2. Department of Management, London School of Economics, London, United Kingdom
3. Warwick Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom

<HR>
Citation style for this article: Del Rio Vilas VJ, Montibeller G, Franco LA. Letter to the editor: Prioritisation of infectious diseases in public health: feedback on the prioritisation methodology, 15 July 2008 to 15 January 2009. Euro Surveill. 2011;16(27):pii=19911. Available online: http://www.eurosurveillance.org/View...rticleId=19911
Date of submission: 29 June 2011 <HR>
To the editor: We read with great interest the results presented by Gilsdorf and Krause (2011) [1] of a survey to experts on the methodology used by Krause et al. (2008) [2] to prioritise 85 pathogens of public health importance. Their work deals with a very relevant subject, given current pressure on health budgets: the allocation of finite disease surveillance and control resources among competing alternatives, infectious diseases in this case. The authors correctly identify the evaluation as being multi-dimensional and compensatory. Unfortunately, they appear to have overlooked findings and principles of well-established methodologies for assessing the impact of multiple effects on non-tradable goods, such as multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) [5]. It is within this perspective that we make our comments.
(?)

- -------