NICE discrimination.
作者信息
Rawlins M, Dillon A
出版信息
J Med Ethics. 2005 Dec;31(12):683-4; discussion 685-8. doi: 10.1136/jme.2005.013813.
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
NICE discrimination.国民保健制度歧视。 （注：NICE在医学领域常指英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所National Institute for Health and Care Excellence，这里按常见含义翻译，具体需结合上下文确定准确意思）
J Med Ethics. 2005 Dec;31(12):683-4; discussion 685-8. doi: 10.1136/jme.2005.013813.
2
Toward a broader view of values in cost-effectiveness analysis of health.迈向健康成本效益分析中更广泛的价值观视角。
Hastings Cent Rep. 1999 May-Jun;29(3):7-15.
3
Searching for a threshold - Not so NICE..寻找一个阈值——没那么美好……
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2007 Jul;12(3):190; author reply 190-1. doi: 10.1258/135581907781543058.
4
It's not NICE to discriminate.歧视是不友好的。
J Med Ethics. 2005 Jul;31(7):373-5. doi: 10.1136/jme.2005.012906.
5
Pharmacogenetic interventions, orphan drugs, and distributive justice: the role of cost-benefit analysis.药物遗传学干预、孤儿药与分配正义：成本效益分析的作用
Soc Philos Policy. 2002 Summer;19(2):246-70. doi: 10.1017/s0265052502192107.
6
Resource allocation for control of infectious diseases in multiple independent populations: beyond cost-effectiveness analysis.多个独立人群中传染病控制的资源分配：超越成本效益分析
J Health Econ. 2003 Jul;22(4):575-98. doi: 10.1016/S0167-6296(03)00043-2.
7
Unintended consequences of applying economic evaluation.应用经济评估的意外后果。
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2002 Jul;7(3):129-30. doi: 10.1258/135581902760082274.
8
How should cost-effectiveness analysis be used in health technology coverage decisions? Evidence from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence approach.成本效益分析应如何用于卫生技术覆盖决策？来自英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所方法的证据。
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2007 Apr;12(2):73-9. doi: 10.1258/135581907780279521.
9
Toward a consensus on the QALY.就质量调整生命年达成共识。
Value Health. 2009 Mar;12 Suppl 1:S31-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00522.x.
10
The ethics of age discrimination and cost-benefit accounting.
Issues Med Ethics. 1999 Oct-Dec;7(4):118-20.
引用本文的文献
1
Cost-Effectiveness and the Distinction Between Quantitative and Qualitative Disability Discrimination.成本效益以及定量与定性残疾歧视之间的区别。
J Bioeth Inq. 2025 Jul 22. doi: 10.1007/s11673-025-10431-w.
2
An empirical ethics study of the coherence of NICE technology appraisal policy and its implications for moral justification.一项关于 NICE 技术评估政策一致性及其对道德论证影响的经验伦理研究
BMC Med Ethics. 2024 Mar 6;25(1):28. doi: 10.1186/s12910-024-01016-0.
3
The ethics of aggregation in cost-effectiveness analysis or, "on books, bookshelves, and budget impact".成本效益分析中的汇总伦理，或“关于书籍、书架与预算影响”
Front Health Serv. 2022 Oct 13;2:889423. doi: 10.3389/frhs.2022.889423. eCollection 2022.
4
Public participation: healthcare rationing in the newspaper media.公众参与：报纸媒体中的医疗保健资源分配
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Mar 28;22(1):407. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-07786-w.
5
Public Reasoning and Health-Care Priority Setting: The Case of NICE.公共推理与医疗保健优先事项设定：以英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所为例
Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2017;27(1):107-134. doi: 10.1353/ken.2017.0005.
6
Cancer Drugs Fund 2.0: A Missed Opportunity?癌症药物基金2.0：一个错失的机遇？
Pharmacoeconomics. 2016 Jul;34(7):629-33. doi: 10.1007/s40273-016-0403-2.
7
Societal values in the allocation of healthcare resources: is it all about the health gain?社会价值观在医疗资源配置中的作用：是否全在于健康收益？
Patient. 2011;4(4):207-25. doi: 10.2165/11588880-000000000-00000.
8
A NICE fallacy.一个美好的谬误。
J Med Ethics. 2007 Aug;33(8):465-6. doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.018556.
Zotero 插件