Dataset Information

Integrating social justice concerns into economic evaluation for healthcare and public health: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT: Social justice is the moral imperative to avoid and remediate unfair distributions of societal disadvantage. In priority setting in healthcare and public health, social justice reaches beyond fairness in the distribution of health outcomes and economic impacts to encompass fairness in the distribution of policy impacts upon other dimensions of well-being. There is an emerging awareness of the need for economic evaluation to integrate all such concerns. We performed a systematic review (1) to describe methodological solutions suitable for integrating social justice concerns into economic evaluation, and (2) to describe the challenges that those solutions face. To be included, publications must have captured fairness considerations that (a) involve cross-dimensional subjective personal life experience and (b) can be manifested at the level of subpopulations. We identified relevant publications using an electronic search in EMBASE, PubMed, EconLit, PsycInfo, Philosopher's Index, and Scopus, including publications available in English in the past 20 years. Two reviewers independently appraised candidate publications, extracted data, and synthesized findings in narrative form. Out of 2388 publications reviewed, 26 were included. Solutions sought either to incorporate relevant fairness considerations directly into economic evaluation or to report them alongside cost-effectiveness measures. The majority of reviewed solutions, if adapted to integrate social justice concerns, would require their explicit quantification. Four broad challenges related to the implementation of these solutions were identified: clarifying the normative basis; measuring and determining the relative importance of criteria representing that basis; combining the criteria; and evaluating trade-offs. All included solutions must grapple with an inherent tension: they must either face the normative and operational challenges of quantifying social justice concerns or accede to offering incomplete policy guidance. Interdisciplinary research and broader collaborations are crucial to address these challenges and to support due attention to social justice in priority setting.

SUBMITTER: Dukhanin V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6545595 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Integrating social justice concerns into economic evaluation for healthcare and public health: A systematic review.

Dukhanin Vadim V Searle Alexandra A Zwerling Alice A Dowdy David W DW Taylor Holly A HA Merritt Maria W MW

Social science & medicine (1982) 20171214

Social justice is the moral imperative to avoid and remediate unfair distributions of societal disadvantage. In priority setting in healthcare and public health, social justice reaches beyond fairness in the distribution of health outcomes and economic impacts to encompass fairness in the distribution of policy impacts upon other dimensions of well-being. There is an emerging awareness of the need for economic evaluation to integrate all such concerns. We performed a systematic review (1) to des ...[more]

PMID: 29274616

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIf Public Health is the science and art of how society collectively aims to improve health, and reduce inequalities in health, then Public Health Economics is the science and art of supporting decision making as to how society can use its available resources to best meet these objectives and minimise opportunity cost. A systematic review of published guidance for the economic evaluation of public health interventions within this broad public policy paradigm was conducted.MethodsElectronic databases and organisation websites were searched using a 22 year time horizon (1990-2012). References of papers were hand searched for additional papers for inclusion. Government reports or peer-reviewed published papers were included if they; referred to the methods of economic evaluation of public health interventions, identified key challenges of conducting economic evaluations of public health interventions or made recommendations for conducting economic evaluations of public health interventions. Guidance was divided into three categories UK guidance, international guidance and observations or guidance provided by individual commentators in the field of public health economics. An assessment of the theoretical frameworks underpinning the guidance was made and served as a rationale for categorising the papers.ResultsWe identified 5 international guidance documents, 7 UK guidance documents and 4 documents by individual commentators. The papers reviewed identify the main methodological challenges that face analysts when conducting such evaluations. There is a consensus within the guidance that wider social and environmental costs and benefits should be looked at due to the complex nature of public health. This was reflected in the theoretical underpinning as the majority of guidance was categorised as extra-welfarist.ConclusionsIn this novel review we argue that health economics may have come full circle from its roots in broad public policy economics. We may find it useful to think in this broader paradigm with respect to public health economics. We offer a 12 point checklist to support government, NHS commissioners and individual health economists in their consideration of economic evaluation methodology with respect to the additional challenges of applying health economics to public health.

Project description:Importance:The 2016 US presidential election brought national visibility to prominent economic issues affecting rural America, yet little has been done to examine serious health or economic problems in rural communities from the perspectives of rural US adults themselves. Objective:To examine views on the most serious health and economic concerns and potential solutions in rural communities. Design, Setting, and Participants:This survey study used 2 cross-sectional probability-based telephone (cellular and landline) surveys of adults living in the rural United States. The first survey was conducted June 6 to August 4, 2018, and the second survey was conducted January 31 to March 2, 2019. All results were weighted to be nationally representative of rural US adults. Data analysis was conducted in April 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary study outcomes were the prevalence of rural adults reporting their biggest community problems, problems with health care access and costs, ratings of the local economy, views on opioid addiction, and views on solving major community issues. Results:The 2018 survey included 1300 respondents (response rate, 12%; completion rate, 70%), and the 2019 survey included 1405 respondents (response rate, 8%; completion rate, 76%). Rural adults primarily identified as non-Hispanic white (78%), and more than half of respondents were 50 years or older (survey 1: 55%, survey 2: 53%). Rural adults identified opioid or other drug addiction or abuse (25%; 95% CI, 22%-28%) and economic concerns (21%; 95% CI, 19%-24%) as the most serious problems facing their local communities. Opioid or other drug addiction or abuse was reported as a serious problem in their local community by 57% (95% CI, 53%-60%) of rural adults, while 49% (95% CI, 46%-53%) of rural adults said they personally know someone who has had opioid addiction. Problems paying medical bills were reported by 32% (95% CI, 29%-36%) of rural adults, and recent issues with accessing health care were reported by 26% (95% CI, 23%-30%) of rural adults. Regarding financial and economic issues, 55% (95% CI, 52%-59%) of rural adults rated their local economy as only fair or poor, and 49% (95% CI, 44%-54%) of rural adults said they would have difficulty paying off an unexpected $1000 expense. On solving major community problems, 58% (95% CI, 54%-62%) of rural adults saw a need for outside help to solve major community problems, and among those who reported needing outside help, 61% (95% CI, 57%-66%) identified a major role for government. Conclusions and Relevance:These findings suggest that in today's economically stretched rural United States, opioid or other drug addiction or abuse has emerged as an equal problem with economic concerns. One in 3 rural adults still have problems paying their medical bills even after the passage and implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Although rural communities have traditionally been self-reliant, more than half of rural adults are open to outside help to solve serious problems facing their communities, including major help from government.

Project description:Inequities have a profound impact on the health and development of children globally. While inequities are greatest in the world's poorest countries, even in rich nations poorer children have poorer health and developmental outcomes. From birth through childhood to adolescence, morbidity, mortality, growth and development are socially determined, resulting in the most disadvantaged having the highest risk of poor health outcomes. Inequities in childhood impact across the life course. We consider four categories of actions to promote equity: strengthening individuals, strengthening communities, improving living and working conditions, and promoting healthy macropolicies. Inequities can be reduced but action to reduce inequities requires political will. The International Society for Social Paediatrics and Child Health (ISSOP) calls on governments, policy makers, paediatricians and professionals working with children and their organisations to act to reduce child health inequity as a priority. ISSOP recommends the following: governments act to reduce child poverty; ensure rights of all children to healthcare, education and welfare are protected; basic health determinants such as adequate nutrition, clean water and sanitation are available to all children. Paediatric and child health organisations ensure that their members are informed of the impact of inequities on children's well-being and across the life course; include child health inequities in curricula for professionals in training; publish policy statements relevant to their country on child health inequities; advocate for evidence-based pro-equity interventions using a child rights perspective; advocate for affordable, accessible and quality healthcare for all children; promote research to monitor inequity as well as results of interventions in their child populations. Paediatricians and child health professionals be aware of the impact of social determinants of health on children under their care; ensure their clinical services are accessible and acceptable to all children and families within the constraints of their country's health services; engage in advocacy at community and national level.

Dataset Information

Integrating social justice concerns into economic evaluation for healthcare and public health: A systematic review.

Publications

Integrating social justice concerns into economic evaluation for healthcare and public health: A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets