• 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

医疗保健作为一项普遍权利。

Health care as a universal right.

作者信息

Nunes Rui, Nunes Sofia B, Rego Guilhermina

机构信息

Faculty of Medicine of the University of Porto, Estrada da Circunvalação 9925, 4250-150 Porto, EU Portugal.

出版信息

Z Gesundh Wiss. 2017;25(1):1-9. doi: 10.1007/s10389-016-0762-3. Epub 2016 Aug 9.

DOI:10.1007/s10389-016-0762-3
PMID:28133598
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5236078/
Abstract

PURPOSE

Most developed societies recognise the existence of a basic right of access to health care of appropriate quality, considering it a positive welfare right. It can even be one of the most important achievements of pluralistic and secular societies. The main objective of this study is to suggest the foundations for a universal right to health care, meaning the right of access to health care of appropriate quality. A second objective is to propose the necessary tools so that access to health care is viable in a specific commonwealth in accordance with available resources.

METHODS

To find this balance between an existing variable geometry and the actual level of resources of each specific commonwealth, the authors suggest the compatibility between Norman Daniels' "accountability for reasonableness" and the integrated view of health of the World Health Organisation through the "equal opportunity function".

RESULTS

The equal opportunity function appears to be an ethically acceptable solution for the existing variable geometry because it allows for different levels of provision and promotes an ethical rationing fully respecting accountability for reasonableness.

CONCLUSION

The basic right of access to health care of appropriate quality is a fundamental humanitarian principle that should be enjoyed by all citizens of all countries, and the international community should recognise the obligation to promote these ideals by any means available. Indeed, although social rights such as health care demand citizens' solidarity to be enjoyed, only with the universalisation of social rights will humanity be more equal in the future.

摘要

目的

大多数发达社会承认存在获得适当质量医疗保健的基本权利,并将其视为一项积极的福利权利。它甚至可能是多元世俗社会最重要的成就之一。本研究的主要目的是为普遍的医疗保健权奠定基础,即获得适当质量医疗保健的权利。第二个目的是提出必要的工具,以便根据可用资源,在特定的联邦中实现医疗保健的可及性。

方法

为了在现有的可变结构与每个特定联邦实际资源水平之间找到这种平衡,作者通过“平等机会功能”,提出诺曼·丹尼尔斯的“合理性问责制”与世界卫生组织对健康的综合观点之间的兼容性。

结果

平等机会功能似乎是解决现有可变结构的一个符合伦理的方案,因为它允许不同的供应水平,并促进完全尊重合理性问责制的伦理配给。

结论

获得适当质量医疗保健的基本权利是一项基本的人道主义原则,所有国家的所有公民都应享有,国际社会应认识到有义务通过一切可用手段促进这些理想。的确,尽管诸如医疗保健等社会权利需要公民团结才能享有,但只有实现社会权利的普遍化,人类未来才会更加平等。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5a4c/5236078/004fa11431da/10389_2016_762_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5a4c/5236078/2ab647741380/10389_2016_762_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5a4c/5236078/004fa11431da/10389_2016_762_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5a4c/5236078/2ab647741380/10389_2016_762_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5a4c/5236078/004fa11431da/10389_2016_762_Fig2_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Health care as a universal right.医疗保健作为一项普遍权利。
Z Gesundh Wiss. 2017;25(1):1-9. doi: 10.1007/s10389-016-0762-3. Epub 2016 Aug 9.
2
Priority setting in health care: a complementary approach.医疗保健中的优先事项设定:一种互补方法。
Health Care Anal. 2014 Sep;22(3):292-303. doi: 10.1007/s10728-013-0243-6.
3
Justice and procedure: how does "accountability for reasonableness" result in fair limit-setting decisions?正义与程序:“合理性问责制”如何带来公平的限制设定决策?
J Med Ethics. 2009 Jan;35(1):12-6. doi: 10.1136/jme.2008.024430.
4
Healthcare regulation as a tool for public accountability.作为公共问责手段的医疗保健监管。
Med Health Care Philos. 2009 Aug;12(3):257-64. doi: 10.1007/s11019-008-9177-4. Epub 2009 Jan 11.
5
Ethically acceptable prioritisation of childless couples and treatment rationing: "accountability for reasonableness".无子女夫妇在伦理上可接受的优先排序与治疗配给:“合理性问责”
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2008 Aug;139(2):176-86. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2008.02.018. Epub 2008 Apr 15.
6
[Shared governance and reasonableness as ethical contributions to health policy].
Rev Esp Salud Publica. 2013 Mar-Apr;87(2):137-47. doi: 10.4321/S1135-57272013000200004.
7
The right to a decent minimum of health care.享有基本体面医疗保健的权利。
Philos Public Aff. 1984 Winter;13(1):55-78.
8
Beyond accountability for reasonableness.超越合理性问责。
Bioethics. 2008 Feb;22(2):101-12. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2007.00605.x.
9
Antimicrobial stewardship programmes: bedside rationing by another name?抗菌药物管理项目:换汤不换药的床边配给制?
J Med Ethics. 2017 Oct;43(10):684-687. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2015-102785. Epub 2017 Mar 15.
10
Health, Health Care, and Equality of Opportunity: The Rationale for Universal Health Care.健康、医疗保健和机会均等:全民医保的基本原理。
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2023 Jan;32(1):26-33. doi: 10.1017/S0963180122000469.

引用本文的文献

1
Characteristics of LGBTQ+ Patients and Their Care in Comparison with Heterosexual Individuals: What Is Important for the OBGYN?LGBTQ+患者的特征及其与异性恋者相比的护理情况:对妇产科医生来说什么是重要的?
Medicina (Kaunas). 2025 Jul 2;61(7):1209. doi: 10.3390/medicina61071209.
2
Exploring the barriers to healthcare access among persons with disabilities: a qualitative study in rural Luuka district, Uganda.探索乌干达卢卡区农村残疾人获得医疗保健的障碍:一项定性研究。
BMJ Open. 2024 Nov 2;14(11):e086194. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-086194.
3
Suggested solutions to barriers in accessing healthcare by persons with disability in Uganda: a qualitative study.

本文引用的文献

1
Beneficence, justice, and health care.善行、正义与医疗保健。
Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2014 Mar;24(1):27-49. doi: 10.1353/ken.2014.0004.
2
Setting priorities for high-cost medications in public hospitals in Australia: should the public be involved?为澳大利亚公立医院的高成本药物设定优先次序:公众是否应参与其中?
Aust Health Rev. 2011 May;35(2):191-6. doi: 10.1071/AH09746.
3
Justice and procedure: how does "accountability for reasonableness" result in fair limit-setting decisions?正义与程序:“合理性问责制”如何带来公平的限制设定决策?
乌干达残疾人获得医疗保健障碍的解决方案建议:一项定性研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Aug 31;24(1):1010. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11448-4.
4
The Potentials of Digital Workplace Health Promotion.数字工作场所健康促进的潜力。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2024 Jul 10;21(7):902. doi: 10.3390/ijerph21070902.
5
Magnitude of health expenditure induced removable poverty in India: Some reflections of Ayushman Bharat.印度卫生支出规模引发的可消除贫困:关于阿育吠陀健康保险的一些思考
Heliyon. 2023 Dec 13;10(1):e23464. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e23464. eCollection 2024 Jan 15.
6
Task interruptions from the perspective of work functions: The development of an observational tool applied to inpatient hospital care in France The Team'IT tool.从工作职能角度看任务中断:适用于法国住院患者护理的观察工具的开发。
PLoS One. 2023 Mar 9;18(3):e0282721. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0282721. eCollection 2023.
7
Study on the Spatial Differentiation of Public Health Service Capabilities of European Union under the Background of the COVID-19 Crisis.新冠疫情危机背景下欧盟公共卫生服务能力的空间分异研究
Healthcare (Basel). 2020 Sep 24;8(4):358. doi: 10.3390/healthcare8040358.
J Med Ethics. 2009 Jan;35(1):12-6. doi: 10.1136/jme.2008.024430.
4
Implementing accountability for reasonableness--the case of pharmaceutical reimbursement in Sweden.实施合理性问责制——瑞典药品报销案例
Health Econ Policy Law. 2007 Apr;2(Pt 2):153-71. doi: 10.1017/S1744133107004082.
5
Beyond accountability for reasonableness.超越合理性问责。
Bioethics. 2008 Feb;22(2):101-12. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2007.00605.x.
6
NICE and judicial review: enforcing 'accountability for reasonableness' through the courts?英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)与司法审查:通过法院强制实行“合理性问责制”?
Med Law Rev. 2008 Spring;16(1):127-40. doi: 10.1093/medlaw/fwm025. Epub 2008 Jan 16.
7
Priority setting at the micro-, meso- and macro-levels in Canada, Norway and Uganda.加拿大、挪威和乌干达在微观、中观和宏观层面的优先事项设定。
Health Policy. 2007 Jun;82(1):78-94. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2006.09.001. Epub 2006 Oct 10.
8
Accountability for reasonableness: opening the black box of process.合理性问责制:打开过程的黑匣子。
Health Care Anal. 2005 Dec;13(4):261-73. doi: 10.1007/s10728-005-8124-2.
9
Involving the general public in priority setting: experiences from Australia.让公众参与确定优先事项:来自澳大利亚的经验。
Soc Sci Med. 2003 Mar;56(5):1001-12. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00091-6.
10
A proposed ethical framework for prescription drug benefit allocation policy.
J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash). 2003 Jan-Feb;43(1):69-74.