Rationing: the case for "muddling through elegantly".
作者信息
Hunter D J
出版信息
BMJ. 1995 Sep 23;311(7008):811. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7008.811.
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
Rationing: the case for "muddling through elegantly".定量配给：“巧妙应付”的理由。
BMJ. 1995 Sep 23;311(7008):811. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7008.811.
2
Rationing healthcare: the appeal of muddling through elegantly.医疗资源配给：巧妙地敷衍了事的吸引力。
Healthc Pap. 2001;2(2):31-7; discussion 69-75. doi: 10.12927/hcpap.2001.17455.
3
Health care rationing. Muddling through leaves matters to chance.医疗保健配给。敷衍了事会让事情听天由命。
BMJ. 1995 Sep 9;311(7006):686. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7006.686b.
4
Muddling through elegantly: finding the proper balance in rationing.巧妙应对：在资源分配中找到恰当平衡。
Health Aff (Millwood). 1997 Sep-Oct;16(5):83-92. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.16.5.83.
5
Explicit and implicit rationing: taking responsibility and avoiding blame for health care choices.明确和隐性的医疗资源配给：为医疗保健选择承担责任并避免指责。
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2001 Jul;6(3):163-9. doi: 10.1258/1355819011927422.
6
The rationing debate. Rationing within the NHS should be explicit. The case against.配给制辩论。国民医疗服务体系内的配给制应该是明确的。反对的理由。
BMJ. 1997 Apr 12;314(7087):1118-22. doi: 10.1136/bmj.314.7087.1118.
7
Rationing health care. Rationing may be good.医疗保健配给。配给可能是有益的。
BMJ. 1997 Feb 15;314(7079):515.
8
The rationing debate. Central government should have a greater role in rationing decisions. The case against.配给制辩论。中央政府在配给决策中应发挥更大作用。反对观点。
BMJ. 1997 Mar 29;314(7085):970-3. doi: 10.1136/bmj.314.7085.970.
9
Health care rationing. Implicit rationing should take place within a framework.医疗保健资源分配。隐性资源分配应在一个框架内进行。
BMJ. 1995 Sep 9;311(7006):686. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7006.686.
10
Rationing health care. Britain could still have a comprehensive NHS without rationing.医疗保健配给。英国仍然可以拥有一个无需配给的全面的国民医疗服务体系。
BMJ. 1996 Aug 31;313(7056):557. doi: 10.1136/bmj.313.7056.557a.
引用本文的文献
1
The sociology of rationing: Towards increased interdisciplinary dialogue - A critical interpretive literature review.配给制的社会学：迈向增进跨学科对话——批判性阐释文献综述。
Sociol Health Illn. 2022 Sep;44(8):1287-1304. doi: 10.1111/1467-9566.13507. Epub 2022 Jun 12.
2
Does NICE apply the rule of rescue in its approach to highly specialised technologies?NICE 在其对高度专业化技术的方法中是否适用救援规则？
J Med Ethics. 2022 Feb;48(2):118-125. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106759. Epub 2021 Mar 8.
3
Rationing. Politicians, not doctors, must make the decisions about rationing.定量配给。必须由政治家而非医生做出关于定量配给的决策。
BMJ. 1999 Apr 3;318(7188):940. doi: 10.1136/bmj.318.7188.940.
4
Puzzling out priorities. Why we must acknowledge that rationing is a political process.理清优先事项。为何我们必须承认配给是一个政治过程。
BMJ. 1998 Oct 10;317(7164):959-60. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7164.959.
5
Public discussion of rationing decisions is essential.对配给决策进行公开讨论至关重要。
BMJ. 1996 Jan 20;312(7024):184. doi: 10.1136/bmj.312.7024.184.
本文引用的文献
1
Professional judgment and the rationing of medical care.专业判断与医疗资源的分配
Univ PA Law Rev. 1992 May;140(5):1713-54.
2
Health care rationing.医疗保健资源分配
BMJ. 1995 Jun 10;310(6993):1483-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.310.6993.1483.
Zotero 插件