首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>BMC Health Services Research >What do District Health Planners in Tanzania think about improving priority setting using Accountability for Reasonableness?
【2h】

What do District Health Planners in Tanzania think about improving priority setting using Accountability for Reasonableness?

机译:坦桑尼亚的地区卫生计划人员对使用负责任的合理性改善优先级设置有何看法?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

BackgroundPriority setting in every health system is complex and difficult. In less wealthy countries the dominant approach to priority setting has been Burden of Disease (BOD) and cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), which is helpful, but insufficient because it focuses on a narrow range of values – need and efficiency – and not the full range of relevant values, including legitimacy and fairness. 'Accountability for reasonableness' is a conceptual framework for legitimate and fair priority setting and is empirically based and ethically justified. It connects priority setting to broader, more fundamental, democratic deliberative processes that have an impact on social justice and equity. Can 'accountability for reasonableness' be helpful for improving priority setting in less wealthy countries?
机译:背景技术每个卫生系统中的优先级设置都很复杂且困难。在富裕程度较低的国家,确定优先重点的主要方法是疾病负担(BOD)和成本效益分析(CEA),这很有帮助,但不足,因为它只关注狭窄的价值范围(需求和效率),而不是全面的相关价值,包括合法性和公平性。 “合理性责任制”是为合理和公平地确定优先顺序而设计的概念框架,它是基于经验的,并且在伦理上是合理的。它把优先事项确定与对社会正义和公平产生影响的更广泛,更根本的民主审议程序联系在一起。 “问责制是否合理”是否有助于改善较富裕国家的优先重点设定?

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号