Accountability for reasonableness - Establishing a fair process for priority setting is easier than agreeing on principles

被引：432

作者：

Daniels, N ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] Tufts Univ, Dept Philosophy, Medford, MA 02155 USA

来源：

BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL | 2000年 / 321卷 / 7272期

关键词：

D O I：

10.1136/bmj.321.7272.1300

中图分类号：

R5 [内科学];

学科分类号：

1002 ; 100201 ;

摘要：

引用

页码：1300 / 1301

页数：2

共 10 条

[1] Limits to health care: Fair procedures, democratic deliberation, and the legitimacy problem for insurers [J].

Daniels, N ;

Sabin, J .

PHILOSOPHY & PUBLIC AFFAIRS, 1997, 26 (04) :303-350

[2] The ethics of accountability in managed care reform [J].

Daniels, N ;

Sabin, J .

HEALTH AFFAIRS, 1998, 17 (05) :50-64

[3]

DANIELS SR, 1993, J HUM HYPERTENS, V7, P223

[4]

HAM C, 1998, TRAGIC CHOICES HLTH

[5]

HAM C, 2000, CONTESTED DECISIONS

[6]

HOHN S, 1998, BRIT MED J, V317, P1000

[7] NICE: a step forward in the quality of NHS care [J].

Horton, R .

LANCET, 1999, 353 (9158) :1028-1029

[8]

Klein R, 2000, STATE HLTH SER, P15

[9]

*NHS EX, 1999, FAST ACC MOD TREATM

[10] Priority setting for new technologies in medicine: qualitative case study [J].

Singer, PA ;

Martin, DK ;

Giacomini, M ;

Purdy, L .

BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 321 (7272) :1316-1319

← 1 →