Evidence map›Paper›PMID 7787651›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)1995

Where should health services go: local authorities versus the NHS?

A M Pollock

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 1995. 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. Short termism in the NHS.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1995
    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

1 author.

A M PollockDepartment of Public Health Sciences, St George's Medical School, London.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Association of Metropolitan Authorities has recently proposed that responsibility for the NHS should pass from health authorities to local authorities. One of the fiercest debates at the outset of the NHS was whether the hospitals should be run by local authorities. In the end the minister for health, Aneurin Bevan, decided against local democracy and in favour of a national health service. His arguments included the fact that equality of treatment could not be guaranteed if facilities varied with local finances and that even the largest authorities were not big enough to pool risks and expertise. All these arguments still apply today, and the recent changes in community care provide an insight into how a market model of local authority control might work. The changes have been accompanied by a shift from public to private sector provision and the introduction of charges for services that the NHS once provided free. As important, the willingness and ability of local authorities to raise extra revenue from local taxes and charges affect the service they can provide, so leading to inequalities of provision. Local authorities have yet to make the case that they can preserve the fundamental principles and benefits of the NHS, including its reliance on central taxation and unified funding formulas.

Indexed as

Health Services AdministrationBudgetsDelivery of Health CareFinancing, OrganizedHealth ExpendituresHealth PolicyHealth ServicesHealth Services AccessibilityLocal GovernmentPrivate SectorRegional Health PlanningRegional Medical ProgramsSocial SecurityState MedicineUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID7787651
PMCPMC2549948

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.