Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39219089›Full record

ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2025

Clinical decision-making process and distributive justice: The mediating role of economic analysis. Empirical evidence from Italy.

Anna Arcari, Mario Picozzi, Anna Pistoni, Davide Battisti, Silvia Ceruti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Anna ArcariDepartment of Economics, Insubria University, Varese, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1144-6166
Mario PicozziDepartment of Biotechnology and Life Science, Insubria University, Varese, Italy.
Anna PistoniDepartment of Economics, Insubria University, Varese, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4346-5188
Davide BattistiDepartment of Law, University of Bergamo, Bergamo, Italy.
Silvia CerutiDepartment of Biotechnology and Life Science, Research Center for Clinical Ethic, Insubria University, Varese, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has not only tested the resilience of public health systems but also underscored the criticality of allocative choices on health resources. These choices, however, are not confined to health emergencies but are integral to public health decisions, which inherently grapple with limited resources. In this context, physicians play a pivotal role as the architects of clinical actions in various scenarios. Therefore, doctors are called upon to make their decisions by considering not only the criteria of clinical appropriateness but also the ethical aspects linked, in particular, to the principle of justice. Indeed, the assessment of the effectiveness of a treatment for a particular patient must be balanced against criteria of equity and justice for the whole. To be fully applied, the principle of justice presupposes the use of economic evaluation techniques designed to drive the organisation decisions by effectiveness and efficiency.

methodsThe present paper aims to empirically analyse whether and to what extent economic evaluation is known and used by doctors in healthcare decision-making and, therefore, what the most widespread approaches are used in such processes. In particular, this paper intends to present the results of an empirical study on a sample of doctors registered with the Order of Physicians in Lombardy (Italy), one of the areas most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

resultsThe research reveals a particular awareness of the criticality of allocation issues accompanied by a lack of knowledge of the economic evaluation techniques or, more broadly, by an almost total disuse of financial criteria. The main reasons are doctors' need for more knowledge of these tools and insufficient availability of economic information at the country system level.

conclusionIn the conclusion, we propose some suggestions to facilitate the transition to more current decision-making models consistent with the characteristics of more advanced national healthcare contexts.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingCOVID-19Health Care RationingSocial JusticeFemaleHumansItalyMalePandemicsSARS-CoV-2evaluationhealth economicsmedical educationpublic health

Identifiers

PMID39219089
PMCPMC11938809

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.