Assessment 2: Priority setting assessment Read the three papers on priority setting in different health care settings below: Paper 1) Viergever et al XXXXXXXXXXA checklist for health research...

Introduction
Socioeconomic status (SES) is one of the most commonly used concepts in health research. Literature studies have stated that the socio-economic conditions influence human health. For most of the world's population, health status is determined based upon their level of the
socio-economic development, e.g., per capita, education, nutrition, the political system of the country, employment, housing, etc. [1]
Indicators of socioeconomic status
The indicators measuring the socioeconomic status include the household income, household conditions, education and the occupation. The economic status of the family can be determined based upon the family size, and the individual’s perception and their behavior towards health in the community.
One of the most important principle for primary health care is addressing and targeting the social determinants of health. The disadvantaged are more likely experience the poor health outcomes and reduced quality of life. Henceforth, priority setting in health care should be concentrated towards the 'upstream' determinants like employment, housing and education. There are few mechanisms through which income could affect health. These include buying access to better quality material resources such as food and shelter and allowing access to health services.[2]
Role of SES in priority setting in healthcare
It plays a major role in reducing the morbidity, increasing life expectancy and improving the standard of living and quality of life. SES acts as important factor in seeking the health care. For example: Coronary heart disease (CHD) is one of the leading causes of death worldwide and along with diabetes, it poses as a threat to the society. This is mainly seen among the Indian Asian population. Literature studies revealed that the incidence of cardiovascular disease in the United States (US) and other high-income countries is higher among the low socio-economic status (SES). (Lee,D.,S. et al, 2009)(Ali et al, 2009) [3][4] Wang, Q., Shen, J. J., & Frakes, K. (2018) reported the rise in the prevalence of chronic diseases due to the complex interaction between increased income and health behaviors. The data was collected from the survey of the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS). Furthermore, to epidemiological data stated the number of patients with cardiovascular disease increased to around 15.7 million in 2010, to 25 million in 2016 among the higher income group individuals.[5]
On the other hand, few diseases like rheumatic arthritis and Tuberculosis were significantly associated with the lower socioeconomic status. This finding were in line with the studies conducted by Pruitt S.L., et al. 2009 & Lantz P.,M., 2010)[6][7] According to the World Health Organization (WHO) global report on hypertension, social determinants of health, e.g. income, has a significant impact on behavioral risk factors and in turn influences the progression of the chronic diseases. Example: Hypertension. These findings were in accordance with the studies conducted by Mwangi, J., Kulane, A., & Van Hoi, L. among Vietnam population. [8]
The housing characteristics act as a material aspect of socioeconomic circumstances. For example: housing tenure— whether housing is occupied by the owner or the tenant. Similarly, in rural population, owning a farm determines the socioeconomic status. Household amenities like access to water, washing machine etc. are also considered for assessing the socioeconomic status. Theses determine the standard of living of the family. For Instance: lack of running water in the household toilet may be associated with increased risk of infections in the community. Apart from the household amenities, household conditions such as the presence of damp condensation, and overcrowding are considered as the housing related indicators of material resources. These are evaluated and used in both industrialized and non-industrialized countries. Overcrowding can affect health by possessing with few economic resources and by the direct spread of infectious diseases.
Priority settings for various health indicators
Priority setting is essential to enhance the impact of healthcare investments, specifically in areas which lack resources. Various factors affect the priority setting for different health indicators. Many authors suggested a variety of frameworks which include multiple elements such as epidemiological, economic, moral, policy, political, and evaluative domains. These frameworks help primary healthcare providers to conceptualize or plan decision making. The common health indicators seen in our population are low-socio-economic status, education, labor force, and unemployment.[1][2]
Factors that influence the priority setting of the health indicators
The factors that influence priority setting include engagement of stakeholders (type and amount), cultural factors, local politics management, and composition of decision maker which includes local ownership, clarity, and size of the process, and representation and awareness. Priority setting is based on the measure of burden, the relative contribution of a particular disease to the total burden, and morbidity and mortality rates.[1]
Effect of occupation on priority setting
Studies have shown that individuals who are involved in productive employment show a lesser incidence of diseases and death. Loss of employment can lead to a loss of status and income, which can lead to social and psychological damage. Occupation is strongly associated with income and status, and thus a direct relation to health can be established. The monetary rewards at work can determine the living standards. Also, social standing is measured by various occupation statuses. Better the occupation, better is the access to education, health care, and residential facilities. Occupations also reflect exposure to specific environmental and occupational hazards and physical demands. All these factors have a significant influence on health outcomes.
Occupation can influence the distribution of health. Centre for Disease Control (CDC), 2013, suggested occupation as a determinant of the outcome of health which can be measured in terms of income, health insurance, workplace environment, and social class.
According to the American Heart Association, there is an increased risk of cardiovascular diseases in individuals with lower status occupations than those with higher status occupations, in the Western nations. In contrast, high-status employers in Japan showed an increased risk of coronary heart diseases when compared to lower status or unskilled employers. It is crucial for public healthcare providers to advice patients based on the ground reality of society....