Sammanfattning
This paper argues that cost-effectiveness analysis in the healthcare sector introduces a discrimination risk that has thus far been underappreciated and outlines some approaches one can take toward this. It is argued that appropriate standards used in cost-effectiveness analysis in the healthcare sector fail to always fully determine an optimal option, which entails that cost-effectiveness analysis often leaves decision makers with large sets of permissible options. Larger sets of permissible options increase the role of decision makers’ biases, whims, and prejudices, which means that the discrimination risk increases. Two ways of mitigating this are identified: tinkering with standards used in the cost-effectiveness analysis and outlining anti-discrimination guidelines for decision makers.
Originalspråk | engelska |
---|---|
Sidor (från-till) | 163–173 |
Antal sidor | 11 |
Tidskrift | Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics |
Volym | 32 |
Nummer | 2 |
DOI | |
Status | Published - 2023 |
Externt publicerad | Ja |
Ämnesklassifikation (UKÄ)
- Hälso- och sjukvårdsorganisation, hälsopolitik och hälsoekonomi
- Nationalekonomi
- Medicinsk etik