• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

Horizontal equity in medical care: a study of the Israeli public's views.

作者信息

Shmueli A

机构信息

Hebrew University School of Public Health, Jerusalem, Israel.

出版信息

Isr Med Assoc J. 2000 Oct;2(10):746-52.

PMID:11344725
Abstract

BACKGROUND

With market failures characterizing the health care sector, societies are continuously searching for ways to achieve an efficient and fair allocation of resources. A natural source of opinion on the desired allocation of health resources is the public. In fact, several governments have recently involved the general public in decisions about resource allocation in their health systems.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the views of the Israeli Jewish public aged 45-75 on horizontal equity in medical care; specifically, the characteristics (including a lottery) for determining which of two individuals with similar medical need should be treated first, against a background of limited resources.

METHODS

A sample of 2,030 individuals was chosen to represent a population of about 800,000 urban Jewish Israelis aged 45-75. Data were collected in face-to-face full sit-down interviews by trained interviewers between October 1993 and February 1994.

RESULTS

The three most preferred prioritizers were chances of recovery, number of dependants, and young age. Random prioritization was preferred by only 8% of the population. Age, level of education and religiosity were the main characteristics associated with the choice.

CONCLUSIONS

The Israeli adult public does not favor strict horizontal equity in health care. As in other social programs, "equals" were defined in a multi-criteria manner, based on both medical need and other personal characteristics. The preferred prioritizers seem to reflect universal tastes and cast doubt on the traditional distinction between efficiency and equity and between horizontal and vertical equity when applied to health care.

摘要

相似文献

1
Horizontal equity in medical care: a study of the Israeli public's views.
Isr Med Assoc J. 2000 Oct;2(10):746-52.
2
Health care priorities as a problem of local resource allocation.作为地方资源分配问题的医疗保健优先事项。
Int J Health Plann Manage. 1998 Jul-Sep;13(3):216-29. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1751(1998070)13:3<216::AID-HPM517>3.0.CO;2-I.
3
Primary care physicians in Israel: self-perception of their role in the healthcare system and policy makers' and patients' perception of them as gatekeepers.以色列的初级保健医生:他们对自身在医疗保健系统中角色的自我认知以及政策制定者和患者对他们作为守门人的认知。
Isr Med Assoc J. 2001 Dec;3(12):893-7.
4
The public's opinions of physicians: do perceived choice and exercised choice matter?公众对医生的看法:感知到的选择和实际做出的选择重要吗?
Am J Manag Care. 2003 Sep;9(9):631-8.
5
Older people's views of prioritization in health care. The applicability of an interview study.老年人对医疗保健优先次序的看法。一项访谈研究的适用性
J Clin Nurs. 2005 Sep;14(8B):64-74. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2005.01278.x.
6
The importance of age in allocating health care resources: does intervention-type matter?年龄在分配医疗保健资源中的重要性:干预类型重要吗?
Health Econ. 2005 Jul;14(7):669-78. doi: 10.1002/hec.958.
7
Thinking about equity in health care.思考医疗保健中的公平性。
J Nurs Manag. 2005 Sep;13(5):397-402. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2834.2005.00578.x.
8
Use of complementary and alternative medicine in Israel: 2000 vs. 1993.以色列补充替代医学的使用情况:2000年与1993年对比
Isr Med Assoc J. 2004 Jan;6(1):3-8.
9
Priority setting and the ethics of resource allocation within VA healthcare facilities: results of a survey.退伍军人事务部医疗设施内的优先事项设定与资源分配伦理:一项调查结果
Organ Ethic. 2008 Fall-Winter;4(2):83-96.
10
Public values, health inequality, and alternative notions of a "fair" response.公共价值、健康不平等与“公平”应对的替代理念。
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2010 Dec;35(6):889-920. doi: 10.1215/03616878-2010-033.

引用本文的文献

1
Public engagement in setting healthcare priorities: a ranking exercise in Cyprus.公众参与确定医疗保健优先事项:塞浦路斯的一项排名活动。
Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2017 Aug 9;15:16. doi: 10.1186/s12962-017-0078-3. eCollection 2017.
2
Who Shall Not Be Treated: Public Attitudes on Setting Health Care Priorities by Person-Based Criteria in 28 Nations.哪些人不应接受治疗:28个国家中公众对基于个人标准设定医疗保健优先顺序的态度。
PLoS One. 2016 Jun 9;11(6):e0157018. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0157018. eCollection 2016.
3
Citizen participation in patient prioritization policy decisions: an empirical and experimental study on patients' characteristics.
公民参与患者优先政策决策:基于患者特征的实证与实验研究。
PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e36824. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0036824. Epub 2012 May 9.
4
The relevance of personal characteristics in allocating health care resources-controversial preferences of laypersons with different educational backgrounds.个人特征在医疗资源分配中的相关性——不同教育背景的外行的有争议的偏好。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2012 Jan;9(1):223-43. doi: 10.3390/ijerph9010223. Epub 2012 Jan 16.
5
Age as a criterion for setting priorities in health care? A survey of the German public view.年龄作为医疗保健优先级设定的标准?德国公众观点调查。
PLoS One. 2011;6(8):e23930. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0023930. Epub 2011 Aug 31.