Literature DB >> 8440504

Public attitudes about the use of chronological age as a criterion for allocating health care resources.

N R Zweibel1, C K Cassel, T Karrison.   

Abstract

We present the first systematic national survey of public opinion on age-based rationing of health care resources. Older people were oversampled in order to allow more precise comparisons of attitude by age cohort as well as by other demographic variables. We found that the majority of people accept the withholding of life-prolonging medical care to hopelessly ill patients, but few would categorically withhold such care on the basis of age. The majority of all ages felt that it was the duty of individual patients regardless of age to refuse medical care that is likely to be futile.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Death and Euthanasia; Empirical Approach; Health Care and Public Health

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8440504     DOI: 10.1093/geront/33.1.74

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gerontologist        ISSN: 0016-9013


  11 in total

Review 1.  Health care rationing in the aged: ethical and clinical perspectives.

Authors:  E G Howe; C J Lettieri
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 3.923

Review 2.  Bioethics for clinicians: 13. Resource allocation.

Authors:  M F McKneally; B M Dickens; E M Meslin; P A Singer
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1997-07-15       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 3.  Cost of pharmacological care of the elderly: implications for healthcare resources.

Authors:  Ciaran O'Neill; Carmel M Hughes; James Jamison; Anna Schweizer
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 3.923

4.  The relevance of personal characteristics in allocating health care resources-controversial preferences of laypersons with different educational backgrounds.

Authors:  Jeannette Winkelhage; Adele Diederich
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2012-01-16       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  Age as a criterion for setting priorities in health care? A survey of the German public view.

Authors:  Adele Diederich; Jeannette Winkelhage; Norman Wirsik
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-08-31       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  What do hospital decision-makers in Ontario, Canada, have to say about the fairness of priority setting in their institutions?

Authors:  David Reeleder; Douglas K Martin; Christian Keresztes; Peter A Singer
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2005-01-21       Impact factor: 2.655

7.  Public engagement in setting healthcare priorities: a ranking exercise in Cyprus.

Authors:  Antonis Farmakas; Mamas Theodorou; Petros Galanis; Georgios Karayiannis; Stefanos Ghobrial; Nikos Polyzos; Evridiki Papastavrou; Eirini Agapidaki; Kyriakos Souliotis
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2017-08-09

8.  A Cross-sectional Study Among Healthcare and Non-healthcare Students in Slovenia and Croatia About Do-not Resuscitate Decision-making.

Authors:  Jure Puc; Petra Obadić; Vanja Erčulj; Ana Borovečki; Štefan Grosek
Journal:  Zdr Varst       Date:  2019-06-26

9.  Prioritising health service innovation investments using public preferences: a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Seda Erdem; Carl Thompson
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-08-28       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Who Shall Not Be Treated: Public Attitudes on Setting Health Care Priorities by Person-Based Criteria in 28 Nations.

Authors:  Jana Rogge; Bernhard Kittel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-06-09       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.