Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26122555›Full record

ArticleHealth care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy2015

Governing for the Common Good.

Jennifer Prah Ruger

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. More Carrots, Less Sticks: Encouraging Good Stewardship in the Global Antimicrobial Commons.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
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

1 author.

Jennifer Prah RugerDepartment of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3401 Market Street, Suite 320, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. jenpr@upenn.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The proper object of global health governance (GHG) should be the common good, ensuring that all people have the opportunity to flourish. A well-organized global society that promotes the common good is to everyone's advantage. Enabling people to flourish includes enabling their ability to be healthy. Thus, we must assess health governance by its effectiveness in enhancing health capabilities. Current GHG fails to support human flourishing, diminishes health capabilities and thus does not serve the common good. The provincial globalism theory of health governance proposes a Global Health Constitution and an accompanying Global Institute of Health and Medicine that together propose to transform health governance. Multiple lines of empirical research suggest that these institutions would be effective, offering the most promising path to a healthier, more just world.

Indexed as

Global HealthHealth PolicySocial JusticeGovernmentHumansInternational CooperationCooperationGlobal health governanceHealth capability paradigmInequity aversionProvincial globalismSocial motivation

Identifiers

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.