Suppr超能文献

……的摘要

Précis of .

作者信息

Voorhoeve Alex, Dale Elina, Gopinathan Unni

机构信息

Department of Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method, London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), London, UK.

Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.

出版信息

Health Econ Policy Law. 2025 Jan;20(1):4-8. doi: 10.1017/S1744133124000331. Epub 2025 Jan 7.

Abstract

We summarise key messages from the World Bank Report . A central lesson of the Report is that in decision-making on the path to Universal Health Coverage (UHC), procedural fairness matters alongside substantive fairness. Decision systems should be assessed using a complete conception of procedural fairness that embodies core commitments to impartial and equal consideration of interests and perspectives. These commitments demand that comprehensive information is gathered and disclosed and that justifications for policies are publicly debated; that participation in decision-making is enabled; and that these characteristics of the decision system are institutionalised rather than up to the good will of decision-makers. Procedural fairness can improve equity in outcomes, raise legitimacy and trust, and can help make reforms last. While improving procedural fairness can be costly and there are barriers to achieving it, the range of instruments that countries at varying levels of income and institutional capacity have used with some success shows that, in many contexts, advances in procedural fairness in health financing are possible and worthwhile.

摘要

我们总结了世界银行报告中的关键信息。该报告的一个核心教训是,在通往全民健康覆盖(UHC)的决策过程中,程序公平与实质公平同样重要。决策系统应使用完整的程序公平概念进行评估,该概念体现了对利益和观点进行公正和平等考虑的核心承诺。这些承诺要求收集并披露全面信息,政策理由要进行公开辩论;要使人们能够参与决策;并且决策系统的这些特征应制度化,而不是取决于决策者的善意。程序公平可以改善结果的公平性,提高合法性和信任度,并有助于使改革持续下去。虽然改善程序公平可能成本高昂且存在实现障碍,但不同收入水平和机构能力的国家成功使用的一系列手段表明,在许多情况下,卫生筹资方面的程序公平取得进展是可能且值得的。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验