Various organizations have attempted to formally evaluate and compare the performance of national healthcare systems. In this commentary, I argue that fundamental methodological issues annul many of their conclusions, and question the usefulness and implications of such rankings, before suggesting possible alternatives.
References
Deber R. Healthcare Quarterly [Internet]. Why Did the World Health Organization Rate Canada's Health System as 30th? Some Thoughts on League Tables :: Longwoods.com. [cited 2017Jan1]. Available from: http://www.longwoods.com/content/17238
The world health report 2000 - Health systems: improving performance [Internet]. WHO. World Health Organization; [cited 2017Jan1]. Available from: http://www.who.int/whr/2000/en/
Musgrove P. Judging health systems: reflections on WHO's methods. The Lancet. 2003;361(9371):1817–20.
Almeida C, Braveman P, Gold MR, Szwarcwald CL, Ribeiro JM, Miglionico A, et al. Methodological concerns and recommendations on policy consequences of the World Health Report 2000. The Lancet. 2001;357(9269):1692–7.
Navarro V. Assessment of the World Health Report 2000. The Lancet. 2000;356(9241):1598–601.
Murray CJ, Frenk J. Ranking 37th — Measuring the Performance of the U.S. Health Care System. New England Journal of Medicine. 2010;362(2):98–9.
Murray C, Frenk J. Authors reply to: Musgrove P. Health care system rankings. N Engl J Med. 2010 Apr 22;362(16):1546-7; author reply 1547. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1001849.
Navarro V. The World Health Report 2000: Can Health Care Systems Be Compared Using a Single Measure of Performance? American Journal of Public Health. 2002;92(1):31–4.
Pawson R, Greenhalgh T, Harvey G, Walshe K. Realist review - a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy. 2005;10(suppl 1):21–34.
Brown CA, Lilford RJ. The stepped wedge trial design: a systematic review. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2006Aug;6(1).
