Protagonism (protagonism indicator corresponds to the arithmetic mean of the components) |
The importance of the agents in the regionalization process of decision making in the region |
P04.3: regional Structure of the State Health Department (Board of the Regional Health, Regional Center, etc.) |
The arithmetic mean of the scores and standardization to a scale of 1 to 10. |
Higher values indicate that the informants attributed greater importance of regional structure in the decision making on health in the region |
P05.1: Public establishments of medium and high complexity |
1. Arithmetic mean of each question (P05.1 and P05.3) |
Higher values indicate that the informants attributed greater importance of these establishments in decision making on health in the region |
P05.3: Private establishments non-profit employees/affiliated with SUS of medium and high complexity |
2. Arithmetic mean of two means and standardization to a scale of 1 to 10 |
Higher values indicate that the informants attributed greater importance of these organizations in the decision-making on health in the region |
P06.2: Civil Society Organizations (community associations, pathology carriers entities, service clubs, etc.) |
1. Arithmetic mean of each question (P06.2 and P06.3) |
P06.3: Academic institutions (universities, research institutions) |
2. Arithmetic mean of two means and standardization to a scale of 1 to 10 |
Higher values indicate that the informants attributed greater importance of CIR in decision making on health in the region |
P07.4: Regional Inter-managers Commission (CIR) |
The arithmetic mean of the scores and standardization to a scale of 1 to 10. |
Higher values indicate that the informants attributed greater importance to the Ministry of Health in decision making on health in the region |
P041: Ministry of Health |
The arithmetic mean of the scores and standardization to a scale of 1 to 10. |
Higher values indicate that the informants attributed greater importance to the State Health Department in decision making on health in the region |
P04.2: The State Health Department (central level) |
The arithmetic mean of the scores and standardization to a scale of 1 to 10. |
Higher values indicate that the informants attributed greater importance of COSEMS in decision making on health in the region |
P07.1: COSEMS |
The arithmetic mean of the scores and standardization to a scale of 1 to 10. |
|
Regional importance (indicator corresponds to the arithmetic mean of the components) |
Contribution of the Regional Inter-managers Commission (CIR) in the region |
P15.1: Health policy coordination |
1. Arithmetic mean of each question |
Higher values indicate that the informants attributed greater importance to the CIR contribution in the regionalization process |
P15.2: Resolution of Conflict |
P15.3: Negotiation between public and private entities) |
P15.4: Elaboration on regional planning |
2. Arithmetic mean of two means and standardization to a scale of 1 to 10 |
P15.5: Conformation on care networks |
P15.6: Monitoring and evaluation |
P15.7: Negotiation and financing |
Regionalization Formentor (indicator corresponds to the arithmetic mean of the components) |
Influence of financial incentives in the decisions making on health in the region |
P21.6: Financial incentives from the Federal Government |
1. Arithmetic mean of each question |
Higher values indicate that the informants attributed greater influence of incentives and guidance in the regionalization process |
P21.7: Financial incentives from the State Government |
2. Arithmetic mean of two means and standardization to a scale of 1 to 10 |
|
The influence of the guidelines in the decisions making on health in the region |
P21.1: Ministry of Health Guidelines |
1. Arithmetic mean of each question |
P21.2: The State Health Department Guidelines |
P21.3: Tripartite of the Inter-managers Commission |
Guidelines (CIT) |
2. Arithmetic mean of two means and standardization to a scale of 1 to 10 |
P21.4: Bipartite of the Inter-managers Commission |
Guidelines (CIB) |