ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2005
Ethical principles and the rationing of health care: a qualitative study in general practice.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accountability frameworks: A critical evolution in healthcare.Healthcare management forum · 2025Article
- How health care professionals handle limited resources in primary care - an interview study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Inside general practice ethics: guidelines 'and' 'of' or 'for' good clinical practice.London journal of primary care · 2018Article
- Article
- Multi-criteria decision analysis for setting priorities on HIV/AIDS interventions in Thailand.Health research policy and systems · 2012Article
- Ethics of the ordinary: a class response.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2012Article
- Community-Based Research among Marginalized HIV Populations: Issues of Support, Resources, and Empowerment.Interdisciplinary perspectives on infectious diseases · 2012Article
- Everyday ethics: learning from an 'ordinary' consultation in general practice.London journal of primary care · 2011Article
- Primary care ethics: a body of literature and a community of scholars?Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2011Article
- The role of ethics committees and ethics consultation in allocation decisions: a 4-stage process.Medical care · 2010Article
- Perceived difficulties in managing ethical problems in family practice in Slovenia: cross-sectional study.Croatian medical journal · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResearching sensitive topics, such as the rationing of treatments and denial of care, raises a number of ethical and methodological problems.
aimTo describe the methods and findings from a number of focus group discussions that examined how GPs apply ethical principles when allocating scarce resources. DESIGN OF STUDY: A small-scale qualitative study involving purposive sampling, semi-structured interviews and focus groups.
settingTwenty-four GPs from two contrasting areas of London: one relatively affluent and one relatively deprived.
methodInitial interviews asked GPs to identify key resource allocation issues. The interviews were transcribed and themes were identified. A number of case studies, each illustrative of an ethical issue related to rationing, were written up in the form of vignettes. In focus group discussions, GPs were given a number of these vignettes to debate.
resultsWith respect to the ethical basis for decision making, the findings from this part of the study emphasised the role of social and psychological factors, the influence of the quality of the relationship between GPs and patients and confusion among GPs about their role in decision making.
conclusionThe use of vignettes developed from prior interviews with GPs creates a non-threatening environment to discuss sensitive or controversial issues. The acceptance by GPs of general moral principles does not entail clarity of coherence of the application of these principles in practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
16105371PMC1463218What 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.