Puzzling out priorities. Why we must acknowledge that rationing is a political process.
作者信息
Klein R
出版信息
BMJ. 1998 Oct 10;317(7164):959-60. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7164.959.
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
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.
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.
3
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.
4
On the Oregon trail: rationing health care.在俄勒冈小道上：医疗保健配给
BMJ. 1991 Jan 5;302(6767):1-2. doi: 10.1136/bmj.302.6767.1.
5
Setting priorities, can Britain learn from Sweden?确定优先事项，英国能向瑞典学习吗？
BMJ. 1996 Mar 16;312(7032):691-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.312.7032.691.
6
Priorities and rationing: pragmatism or principles?优先事项与资源分配：实用主义还是原则？
BMJ. 1995 Sep 23;311(7008):761-2. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7008.761.
7
Straight talk about rationing.关于定量配给的直言不讳的讨论。
Ann Intern Med. 1995 May 15;122(10):795-6. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-122-10-199505150-00011.
8
Ethical issues in healthcare prioritization: a political viewpoint.医疗保健资源分配中的伦理问题：一种政治观点。
Br J Urol. 1995 Nov;76 Suppl 2:55-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410x.1995.tb07872.x.
9
Rationing: a transatlantic perspective.定量配给：跨大西洋视角
Br J Gen Pract. 1996 Sep;46(410):543-5.
10
Prioritizing or rationing health care.对医疗保健进行优先级排序或配给。
Ann Intern Med. 1995 Nov 15;123(10):811-2. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-123-10-199511150-00026.
引用本文的文献
1
Political prioritization and the competing definitions of adolescent pregnancy in Kenya: An application of the Public Arenas Model.肯尼亚的政治优先事项和青少年怀孕的竞争定义：公共领域模型的应用。
PLoS One. 2020 Sep 14;15(9):e0238136. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238136. eCollection 2020.
2
Can clinical ethics committees be legitimate actors in bedside rationing?临床伦理委员会能否成为床边配给的合法行为者？
BMC Med Ethics. 2019 Dec 19;20(1):97. doi: 10.1186/s12910-019-0438-y.
3
Challenges to generating political prioritization for adolescent sexual and reproductive health in Kenya: A qualitative study.肯尼亚为青少年性与生殖健康争取政治优先权面临的挑战：一项定性研究
PLoS One. 2019 Dec 19;14(12):e0226426. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0226426. eCollection 2019.
4
Expanded HTA, Legitimacy and Independence Comment on "Expanded HTA: Enhancing Fairness and Legitimacy".扩大卫生技术评估，正当性和独立性 评“扩大卫生技术评估：增强公平性和正当性”
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2016 Sep 1;5(9):565-567. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2016.75.
5
Setting healthcare priorities: a description and evaluation of the budgeting and planning process in county hospitals in Kenya.确定医疗保健优先事项：肯尼亚县级医院预算编制和规划过程的描述与评估
Health Policy Plan. 2017 Apr 1;32(3):329-337. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czw132.
6
Setting Healthcare Priorities at the Macro and Meso Levels: A Framework for Evaluation.宏观和中观层面的医疗保健重点设定：评估框架。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2015 Sep 16;4(11):719-32. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2015.167.
7
The current status of decision-making procedures and quality assurance in Europe: an overview.欧洲决策程序与质量保证的现状：概述
Med Health Care Philos. 2011 Nov;14(4):383-96. doi: 10.1007/s11019-011-9333-0.
8
Evidence-based priority setting for health care and research: tools to support policy in maternal, neonatal, and child health in Africa.循证医疗保健和研究重点制定：支持非洲母婴和儿童健康政策的工具。
PLoS Med. 2010 Jul 13;7(7):e1000308. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000308.
9
Priority setting in health care: Lessons from the experiences of eight countries.医疗保健中的优先事项设定：八个国家经验教训。
Int J Equity Health. 2008 Jan 21;7:4. doi: 10.1186/1475-9276-7-4.
10
A strategy to improve priority setting in developing countries.一种改善发展中国家确定优先事项的策略。
Health Care Anal. 2007 Sep;15(3):159-67. doi: 10.1007/s10728-006-0037-1.
本文引用的文献
1
2
3
4
The ethics of accountability in managed care reform.管理式医疗改革中的问责伦理。
Health Aff (Millwood). 1998 Sep-Oct;17(5):50-64. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.17.5.50.
5
Viagra and rationing. Let the sunlight in, let the people speak.伟哥与定量配给。让阳光照进来，让人民发声。
BMJ. 1998 Sep 19;317(7161):760-1. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7161.760.
6
Setting priorities in the NHS. A framework for decision making. Summary and recommendations of a report of a working party of the Royal College of Physicians.英国国家医疗服务体系中的优先事项设定。决策框架。皇家内科医师学院一个工作小组报告的总结与建议。
J R Coll Physicians Lond. 1995 Sep-Oct;29(5):379-80.
7
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.
Zotero 插件