Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37902907›Full record

ArticleTheoretical medicine and bioethics2024

Refund: a defense of luck egalitarian policy in healthcare.

Masahiro Yoshida, Akira Inoue

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Theoretical medicine and bioethics, 2024. 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

2 authors.

Masahiro YoshidaShibuya Kyoiku Gakuen Makuhari Junior and Senior High School, 1-3 Wakaba, Mihama-ku, Chiba-City, Chiba, 261-0014, Japan. myoshida@shibumaku.jp.ORCID 0000-0002-2606-2037
Akira InoueDepartment of Advanced Social and International Studies, Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, University of Tokyo, 3-8-1 Komaba, Meguro-ku, Tokyo, 153-8902, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-7454-7880

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 20H01446Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 22H00598Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 23788563
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Luck egalitarianism assigns a central role to personal responsibility in egalitarian justice. In the context of healthcare, luck egalitarianism is the view that the distribution of medical and healthcare resources-or common resources in general-should respond to the (im)prudence of individuals. Recently, Joar Björk, Gert Helgesson, and Niklas Juth have argued that it is impractical to use luck egalitarianism as a normative framework in healthcare because it has no reasonable way of dealing with the imprudent. In response to their argument, this paper first suggests that the epistemic problems of applying luck egalitarianism to the healthcare context raised by Björk et al. can be circumvented by using the exemption system as a policy application of luck egalitarian healthcare justice. This paper then shows that an ex ante policy, a tax system with refunds, can reasonably be adopted as a luck egalitarian institutional design of healthcare policy. We argue that the proposed conception of luck egalitarianism can deal with the problem of differential option luck. Finally, we show that the threshold problem for the definition of imprudence does not refute the proposed ex ante policy.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareHealth PolicyHumansSocial JusticeImprudenceLuck egalitarianismPragmatic theory of responsibilityRefundThreshold problem

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.