Setting limits fairly - learning to share resources for health
Abstract
1. Our Lives in Whose Hands 2. Justice, Scarcity, and Public Accountability for Limits 3. The Legitimacy Problem and Fair Process 4. Accountability for Reasonableness 5. Managing Last-Chance Therapies 6. Lung Volume Reduction Surgery: A Case Study 7. Making Pharmacy Benefits Accountable for Reasonableness 8. Indirect Limit Setting: Accountability for Physician Incentives 9. Accountability for Reasonableness in Action: Public Sector Mental Health Care Contracting 10. An International Learning Curve 11. Learning to Share Medical Resources 12. Revisiting the International Learning Curve 13. Developing Country Applications of Accountability for Reasonableness 14. New Uses for Accountability for Reasonableness Conclusion: What Next?
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Consistency in the rationale underlying decisions has been described as an important requirement for decision-making to be considered fair.
“consistency in the rationale underlying decisions has been described as an important requirement for decision-making to be considered fair [40].”
From What influences the outcome of active disinvestment processes in healthcare? A qualitative interview study on five recent cases of active disinvestment (2021) · cites this paper as [40]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Democratizing Algorithmic Fairness
Wong, P.-H. (2020) · Philosophy & Technology · doi:10.1007/s13347-019-00355-w · Cited by 182 · see citing works
Rotteveel, A. H., Lambooij, M. S., van de Rijt, J. J. A., van Exel, J., Moons, K. G. M., & de Wit, G. A. (2021) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-021-06298-3 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Public preferences for government spending in Canada
Ramji, S., & Quiñonez, C. (2012) · International Journal for Equity in Health · doi:10.1186/1475-9276-11-64 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
- Venue
- Choice Reviews Online
- Publisher
- American Library Association
- Published
- 2008-11-01
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 03
- Pages
- 46-1513-46-1513
- ISSN
- 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-8253
- OpenAlex
- W3141727052
- Cited by
- 252
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 14
- Type
- book review
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Choice Reviews Online (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Philosophy and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Keywords
- healthcare resource allocation, accountability for reasonableness, public accountability, legitimacy, fair procedure, lung volume reduction surgery, pharmacy benefits, physician incentives, developing countries, health care rationing
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
