© 2004 American Public Health Association
At the time of writing, Philip W. Setel, Lance Saker, Nigel C. Unwin, and David R. Whiting were with the University of Newcastle upon Tyne Medical School, Department of Medicine, Newcastle upon Tyne, England. Philip W. Setel and David R. Whiting are also with the Adult Morbidity and Mortality Project, Ministry of Health, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, as is Yusuf Hemed. Henry Kitange is with the Morogoro Regional Hospital, Morogoro, Tanzania. Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Philip W. Setel, MEASURE Evaluation, Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, CB-1820, Chapel Hill, NC 27516.
The classification of disease burdens is an important topic that receives little attention or debate. One common classification scheme, the broad cause grouping, is based on etiology and health transition theory and is mainly concerned with distinguishing communicable from noncommunicable diseases. This may be of limited utility to policymakers and planners. We propose a broad care needs framework to complement the broad cause grouping. This alternative scheme may be of equal or greater value to planners. We apply these schemes to disability-adjusted life year estimates for 2000 and to mortality data from Tanzania. The results suggest that a broad care needs approach could shift the priorities of health planners and policymakers and deserves further evaluation. This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||