ArticleJournal of medical ethics1999
Equitable rationing of highly specialised health care services for children: a perspective from South Africa.
Article in Journal of medical ethics, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Which Care-Seekers are Prioritized for Preventive Maternal and Child Health Services in a Low-Resource Setting? A Vignette Experiment in Rural Guinea-Bissau.Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH · 2026Article
- Ethics in humanitarian settings-relevance and consequences for dialysis and kidney care.Clinical kidney journal · 2024Review
- Looking ahead: ethical and social challenges of somatic gene therapy for sickle cell disease in Africa.Gene therapy · 2024Review
- Real-world disparities and ethical considerations with access to CFTR modulator drugs: Mind the gap!Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Review
- Should EOAD patients be included in clinical trials?Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2011Article
- Disability and treatment of psychiatric and physical disorders in South Africa.The Journal of nervous and mental disease · 2010Article
- Prognosis without treatment as a modifier in health economic assessments.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2005Review
- Ethical issues in funding orphan drug research and development.Journal of medical ethics · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The principles of equality and equity, respectively in the Bill of Rights and the white paper on health, provide the moral and legal foundations for future health care for children in South Africa. However, given extreme health care need and scarce resources, the government faces formidable obstacles if it hopes to achieve a just allocation of public health care resources, especially among children in need of highly specialised health care. In this regard, there is a dearth of moral analysis which is practically useful in the South African situation. We offer a set of moral considerations to guide the macro-allocation of highly specialised public health care services among South Africa's children. We also mention moral considerations which should inform micro-allocation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.