Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22147821›Full record

ReviewChest2011

The ethics and reality of rationing in medicine.

Leslie P Scheunemann, Douglas B White

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Chest, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 75 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
75citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

75 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Ozempic and Wegovy Meet Congress: Political Economy Without Critique and Sociology Without Society.International journal of social determinants of health and health services · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

15 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Leslie P ScheunemannDivision of Geriatric Medicine and Center for Aging and Health, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, NC; Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
Douglas B WhiteDivision of Geriatric Medicine and Center for Aging and Health, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill, NC; Program on Ethics and Decision Making in Critical Illness, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA; Center for Bioethics and Health Law, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. Electronic address: whitedb@upmc.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rationing is the allocation of scarce resources, which in health care necessarily entails withholding potentially beneficial treatments from some individuals. Rationing is unavoidable because need is limitless and resources are not. How rationing occurs is important because it not only affects individual lives but also expresses society's most important values. This article discusses the following topics: (1) the inevitability of rationing of social goods, including medical care; (2) types of rationing; (3) ethical principles and procedures for fair allocation; and (4) whether rationing ICU care to those near the end of life would result in substantial cost savings.

Indexed as

Quality of Health CareSocial JusticeClinical MedicineDelivery of Health CareEthics, MedicalHealth Care RationingHumansResource AllocationUnited States

Identifiers

PMID22147821
PMCPMC3415127

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.