ArticleBioethics2026
Size Does Matter! Prioritizing Rare Diseases for Luck Egalitarian Reasons.
Article in Bioethics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Rarity provides a challenging case for contemporary priority setting. On the one hand, many philosophers and economists argue that rarity has no inherent moral value, and thus that rare diseases merit no special treatment in priority setting decisions simply because they are rare. On the other hand, existing priority-setting practices demonstrate a higher willingness to pay for rare disease treatments. We argue that special priority for rare diseases might be justified on egalitarian grounds. Specifically, we develop and defend what we call the "bad numbers luck" argument for prioritizing rare diseases. This is a variant of the luck egalitarian idea of bad price luck. We conclude by discussing how higher willingness to pay, adjusted priority-setting processes, and a broader societal focus on rare diseases could address such injustices. Recognising bad numbers luck clarifies the relationship between fairness and efficiency in health care priority setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.