Charvel Sofía, Cobo Fernanda, Larrea Silvana, Baglietto Juliana
An assistant professor of law in the Academic Department of Law at the Autonomous Technological Institute, Río Hondo 1, Mexico City 01080, Mexico.
Coordinator of the Public Health Law Program of the Academic Department of Law at the Autonomous Technological Institute, Río Hondo 1, Mexico City 01080, Mexico.
Health Hum Rights. 2018 Jun;20(1):173-184.
Priority setting is the process through which a country's health system establishes the drugs, interventions, and treatments it will provide to its population. Our study evaluated the priority-setting legal instruments of Brazil, Costa Rica, Chile, and Mexico to determine the extent to which each reflected the following elements: transparency, relevance, review and revision, and oversight and supervision, according to Norman Daniels's accountability for reasonableness framework and Sarah Clark and Albert Wale's social values framework. The elements were analyzed to determine whether priority setting, as established in each country's legal instruments, is fair and justifiable. While all four countries fulfilled these elements to some degree, there was important variability in how they did so. This paper aims to help these countries analyze their priority-setting legal frameworks to determine which elements need to be improved to make priority setting fair and justifiable.
确定优先事项是一个国家的卫生系统确定将向其民众提供哪些药物、干预措施和治疗方法的过程。我们的研究评估了巴西、哥斯达黎加、智利和墨西哥的确定优先事项的法律文书,以根据诺曼·丹尼尔斯的合理问责框架以及莎拉·克拉克和阿尔伯特·瓦尔的社会价值观框架,确定每项文书在多大程度上体现了以下要素:透明度、相关性、审查与修订以及监督与监管。对这些要素进行了分析,以确定每个国家法律文书中规定的确定优先事项是否公平且合理。虽然所有四个国家在一定程度上都满足了这些要素,但它们实现这些要素的方式存在重要差异。本文旨在帮助这些国家分析其确定优先事项的法律框架,以确定哪些要素需要改进,以使确定优先事项变得公平且合理。