Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Soc Sci Med. 2018 Feb;198:27-35. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.12.012. Epub 2017 Dec 14.
Social justice is the moral imperative to avoid and remediate unfair distributions of societal disadvantage. In priority setting in healthcare and public health, social justice reaches beyond fairness in the distribution of health outcomes and economic impacts to encompass fairness in the distribution of policy impacts upon other dimensions of well-being. There is an emerging awareness of the need for economic evaluation to integrate all such concerns. We performed a systematic review (1) to describe methodological solutions suitable for integrating social justice concerns into economic evaluation, and (2) to describe the challenges that those solutions face. To be included, publications must have captured fairness considerations that (a) involve cross-dimensional subjective personal life experience and (b) can be manifested at the level of subpopulations. We identified relevant publications using an electronic search in EMBASE, PubMed, EconLit, PsycInfo, Philosopher's Index, and Scopus, including publications available in English in the past 20 years. Two reviewers independently appraised candidate publications, extracted data, and synthesized findings in narrative form. Out of 2388 publications reviewed, 26 were included. Solutions sought either to incorporate relevant fairness considerations directly into economic evaluation or to report them alongside cost-effectiveness measures. The majority of reviewed solutions, if adapted to integrate social justice concerns, would require their explicit quantification. Four broad challenges related to the implementation of these solutions were identified: clarifying the normative basis; measuring and determining the relative importance of criteria representing that basis; combining the criteria; and evaluating trade-offs. All included solutions must grapple with an inherent tension: they must either face the normative and operational challenges of quantifying social justice concerns or accede to offering incomplete policy guidance. Interdisciplinary research and broader collaborations are crucial to address these challenges and to support due attention to social justice in priority setting.
社会公正就是要避免和纠正社会劣势分配不公。在医疗保健和公共卫生的优先事项设定中,社会公正超越了健康结果和经济影响分配的公平性,涵盖了政策影响在其他福利维度上的公平性分配。人们越来越意识到需要将所有这些问题纳入经济评估中。我们进行了系统评价(1)描述适合将社会公正问题纳入经济评估的方法解决方案,以及(2)描述这些解决方案所面临的挑战。要被包括在内,出版物必须捕捉到公平性考虑因素,这些因素(a)涉及跨维度的主观个人生活体验,(b)可以在亚人群层面上表现出来。我们使用 EMBASE、PubMed、EconLit、PsycInfo、Philosopher's Index 和 Scopus 中的电子搜索来识别相关出版物,包括过去 20 年中以英文发表的出版物。两名评审员独立评估候选出版物,提取数据,并以叙述形式综合研究结果。在审查的 2388 篇论文中,有 26 篇被纳入。所寻求的解决方案要么直接将相关的公平考虑因素纳入经济评估中,要么与成本效益措施一起报告。如果要适应这些解决方案来整合社会公正问题,大多数审查的解决方案都需要明确量化。确定了与实施这些解决方案相关的四个广泛挑战:澄清规范基础;衡量和确定代表该基础的标准的相对重要性;结合标准;以及评估权衡取舍。所有纳入的解决方案都必须应对一个内在的紧张局面:它们要么面对量化社会公正问题的规范性和操作性挑战,要么承认提供不完整的政策指导。跨学科研究和更广泛的合作对于应对这些挑战和支持在优先事项设定中对社会公正的关注至关重要。