Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42778930›Full record

ReviewPhilosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM2026

Can health justice be measured? A normative reconstruction of health equity indicators.

Akbar Shahrivari

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM, 2026. 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

1 author.

Akbar ShahrivariSchool of Traditional Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran. shahrivari.akbar@yahoo.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth systems commonly evaluate justice using quantitative health equity indicators such as healthcare coverage, financial protection, population health outcomes, and measures of the social determinants of health. These indicators are often treated as competing operationalisations of a single moral standard. This article argues that this assumption is conceptually mistaken because different indicators evaluate different normative objects rather than alternative dimensions of the same conception of justice.

methodsUsing a comparative normative methodology, the article analyses six theories of justice that have significantly shaped contemporary debates in biomedical ethics and health policy. Through the principles of justificatory attribution and the Focal Attribution Procedure, families of health equity indicators are systematically attributed to the normative domains that provide their primary moral justification.

resultsThe analysis suggests that widely used health equity indicators do not approximate a single moral construct. Instead, they identify distinct evaluative objects corresponding to different conceptions of justice, including aggregate health welfare, fair opportunity, responsibility-sensitive disadvantage, collective health goods, human functioning, and structural disadvantage. Persistent disagreement over health equity indicators therefore reflects normative pluralism rather than empirical or methodological inadequacy. Building on this analysis, the article proposes a Layered Evaluation Model that preserves the conceptual distinction between normative domains while providing a coherent framework for interpreting health equity indicators.

conclusionBecause the normative domains of health justice are conceptually distinct, representing health justice through a single composite index risks obscuring the evaluative objects that different theories seek to protect unless the weights used to construct that index are made explicit and normatively defended. Health equity measurement should therefore be understood as a process of explicit normative interpretation rather than technical aggregation. By systematically relating empirical indicators to their primary justificatory foundations, the proposed framework offers a more conceptually coherent, philosophically grounded, and policy-relevant approach to the evaluation of health justice.

Indexed as

Health EquitySocial JusticeHumansCapability approachHealth equityHealth equity indicatorsHealth justiceJustificatory attributionNormative evaluationStructural justiceTheories of justice

Identifiers

PMID42778930
PMCPMC13599285

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.