Should relational effects be considered in health care priority setting?

It is uncontroversial to claim that the extent to which health care interventions benefit patients is a relevant consideration for health care priority setting. However, when effects accrue to the individual patient, effects of a more indirect kind may accrue to other individuals as well, such as th...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Authors: Gustavsson, Erik (Author) ; Juth, Niklas (Author) ; Lärfars, Gerd (Author) ; Raaschou, Pauline (Author) ; Sandman, Lars (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Wiley-Blackwell 2023
In: Bioethics
Year: 2023, Volume: 37, Issue: 7, Pages: 668-673
IxTheo Classification:NCH Medical ethics
Further subjects:B indirect effects
B need-based health care
B significant others
B priority setting
Online Access: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 1854423762
003 DE-627
005 20230815142415.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 230805s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1111/bioe.13189  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1854423762 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1854423762 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Gustavsson, Erik  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Should relational effects be considered in health care priority setting? 
264 1 |c 2023 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a It is uncontroversial to claim that the extent to which health care interventions benefit patients is a relevant consideration for health care priority setting. However, when effects accrue to the individual patient, effects of a more indirect kind may accrue to other individuals as well, such as the patient's children, friends, or partner. If, and if so how, such relational effects should be considered relevant in priority setting is contentious. In this paper, we illustrate this question by using disease-modifying drugs for Alzheimer's disease as a case in point. The ethical analysis begins by sketching the so-called prima facie case for ascribing moral weight to relational effects and then moves on to consider a number of objections to it. We argue that, whereas one set of objections may be dismissed, there is another set of arguments that poses more serious challenges for including relational effects in priority setting. 
650 4 |a significant others 
650 4 |a priority setting 
650 4 |a need-based health care 
650 4 |a indirect effects 
652 |a NCH 
700 1 |a Juth, Niklas  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Lärfars, Gerd  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Raaschou, Pauline  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Sandman, Lars  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Bioethics  |d Oxford [u.a.] : Wiley-Blackwell, 1987  |g 37(2023), 7, Seite 668-673  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)271596708  |w (DE-600)1480658-7  |w (DE-576)078707986  |x 1467-8519  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:37  |g year:2023  |g number:7  |g pages:668-673 
856 |u https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/bioe.13189  |x unpaywall  |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang  |h publisher [open (via crossref license)] 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13189  |x Resolving-System  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/bioe.13189  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4363269308 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1854423762 
LOK |0 005 20230815142415 
LOK |0 008 230805||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2023-08-04#ACCE831E903E2E1CCA0284E55F72FC2A1A46A816 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a zota 
LOK |0 936ln  |0 1550736558  |a NCH 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw