Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27592208›Full record

ArticleMedicine, health care, and philosophy2017

Priority rules as solutions to conflicting health care rights.

Anna-Karin Andersson, Frode Lindemark, Kjell Arne Johansson

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, health care, and philosophy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Anna-Karin AnderssonDepartment of Global Public Health and Primary Care, Research Group on Global Health Priorities, The University of Bergen, Kalfarveien 31, Postboks 7804, 5020, Bergen, Norway. Anna-Karin.Andersson@igs.uib.no.
Frode LindemarkDepartment of Global Public Health and Primary Care, Research Group on Global Health Priorities, The University of Bergen, Kalfarveien 31, Postboks 7804, 5020, Bergen, Norway.
Kjell Arne JohanssonDepartment of Global Public Health and Primary Care, Research Group on Global Health Priorities, The University of Bergen, Kalfarveien 31, Postboks 7804, 5020, Bergen, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent health legislation in Norway significantly increases access to specialist care within a legally binding time frame. The paper describes the contents of the new legislation and introduces some of the challenges with proliferations of rights to health care. The paper describes some of the challenges associated with the proliferation of legal rights to health care. It explains the benefits of assessing the new law in the light of a rights framework. It then analyses the problematic aspects of establishing additional priority rules as solutions to rights conflicts. It then defends adequacy criteria for acceptable priority rules when such rules are unavoidable. It finally defends our proposed method and explores concrete applications.

Indexed as

Patient RightsConflict, PsychologicalHealth PolicyHealth PrioritiesHumansMedicineNegotiatingNorwayHealth lawPrioritizationPublic healthRights

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.