Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Justice Principles, Prioritization in the Healthcare Sector, and the Effect of Framing

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Priority of Needs?

  • 31 Accesses

Abstract

Prioritizing who to provide healthcare services seems unavoidable under conditions of scarce resources. Triage is one of the best-known approaches for establishing the criteria for healthcare allocation. Here we utilize justice distribution principles, i.e., equity, equality, and need as prioritization criteria and investigate the effects of attribute framing on healthcare allocation decisions. In particular, we discuss psychological theory and previous research on framing effects in terms of delivering and withholding services. We also present recent empirical findings demonstrating that framing influences people’s preferences for justice distribution principles in healthcare.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In contrast to prioritization, which is the specific act of ordering items based on predefined criteria, priority setting is the process of establishing a systematic approach to determine importance across various healthcare interventions.

  2. 2.

    ETKAS was installed in 1996 and emerged from the XCOMB model by Wujciak and Opelz (1993a,b). Since then, it has been modified many times. We do not consider the modified versions here.

References

  • Adams, J. S. (1965): “Inequity in Social Exchange”, in L. Berkowitz (ed.): Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 2, 267–299. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birnkrant, D. J., J. F. Pope, J. E. Martin, A. H. Repucci, and R. M. Eiben (1998): “Treatment of Type I Spinal Muscular Atrophy with Noninvasive Ventilation and Gastrostomy Feeding”, Pediatric Neurology 18 (5), 407–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bognar, G. (2016): “Priority Setting and Age”, in E. Nagel, and M. Lauerer (eds.): Prioritization in Medicine: An International Dialogue, 163–177. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowling, A. (1996): “Health Care Rationing: The Public’s Debate”, British Medical Journal 312 (7032), 670–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruche, J. (2021): Corona: Müssen Ungeimpfte höhere Krankenkassenbeiträge zahlen? Welle der ungeimpften CoViD-19-Patienten schwappt in Krankenhäuser. Südwestrundfunk. https://www.swr.de/swraktuell/baden-wuerttemberg/braucht-es-krankenkassentarife-fuer-ungeimpfte-100.html

  • Bruni, R. A., A. Laupacis, and D. K. Martin (2008): “Public Engagement in Setting Priorities in Health Care”, Canadian Medial Association Journal 179 (1), 15–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busschbach, J. J. V., D. J. Hessing, and F. T. De Charro (1993): “The Utility of Health at Different Stages in Life: A Quantitative Approach”, Social Science and Medicine 37 (2), 153–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cappelen, A. W., and O. F. Norheim (2005): “Responsibility in Health Care: A Liberal Egalitarian Approach”, Journal of Medical Ethics 31, 476–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cappelen, A. W., and O. F. Norheim (2006): “Responsibility, Fairness and Rationing in Health Care”, Health Policy 76 (3), 312–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charny, M. C., P. A. Lewis, and S. C. Farrow (1989): “Choosing Who Shall not Be Treated in the NHS”, Social Science and Medicine 28 (12), 1331–1338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochrane, J. R. (2016): “Fundamental Evaluation Criteria in the Medicine of the Twenty-First Century”, in E. Nagel, and M. Lauerer (eds.): Prioritization in Medicine: An International Dialogue, 11–37. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988): Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cookson, R., and P. Dolan (1999): “Public Views on Health Care Rationing: A Group Discussion Study”, Health Policy 49 (1–2), 63–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culyer, A. J., and A. Wagstaff (1993): “Equity and Equality in Health and Health Care”, Journal of Health Economics 12 (4), 431–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, N. (2007): Just Health: Meeting Health Needs Fairly. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, N., and J. Sabin (2002): Setting Limits Fairly: Can We Learn to Share Medical Resources? Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • De Meester, J., G. G. Persijn, T. Wujciak, G. Opelz, and Y. Vanrenterghem (1998): “The New Eurotransplant Kidney Allocation System–Report One Year After Implementation”, Transplantation 66 (9), 1154–1159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (1975): “Equity, Equality, and Need: What Determines which Value Will Be Used as the Basis of Distributive Justice?”, Journal of Social Issues 31 (3), 137–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diederich, A. (2001): “A Rational Reconstruction of Expert Judgments in Organ Allocation: A Conjoint Measurement Approach”, Analyse and Kritik 23 (2), 245–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diederich, A. (2011): “Einstellungen zu Priorisierungen in der medizinischen Versorgung”, in A. Diederich, C. Koch, R. Kray, and R. Sibbel (eds.): Priorisierte Medizin: Ausweg oder Sackgasse der Gesundheitsgesellschaft?, 13–38. Wiesbaden: Gabler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diederich, A. (2016a): “Age and Personal Responsibility as Prioritization Criteria? The View of the Public and of Physicians”, in E. Nagel, and M. Lauerer (eds): Prioritization in Medicine: An International Dialogue, 241–257. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diederich, A. (2016b): “What Health Care Services Does the Public Want and Who Should Decide? Ask Them!”, Israel Journal of Health Policy Research 5, 47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diederich, A. (2020): “Identifying Needs: The Psychological Perspective”, in S. Traub, and B. Kittel (eds.): Need-Based Distributive Justice: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, 59–89. Cham: Springer Nature.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diederich, A., G. du Bois, and D. Dörr (2015): “Einstellungen zu Priorisierungen in der medizinischen Versorgung: Ergebnisse einer Befragung des Deutschen Ärztinnenbundes (DÄB)”, FOR 655 Working Paper 40/2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diederich, A., D. Salzmann (2015): “Public Preferences Regarding Therapeutic Benefit, Costs of a Medical Treatment and Evidence-Based Medicine as Prioritization Criteria”, Journal of Public Health 23 (3), 137–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diederich, A., and M. Schreier (2009): “Kriterien der Priorisierung aus gesellschaftlicher Sicht”, Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen 103 (2), 111–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diederich, A., and M. Schreier (2010): “Zur Akzeptanz von Eigenverantwortung als Posteriorisierungskriterium”, Bundesgesundheitsblatt-Gesundheitsforschung-Gesundheitsschutz 53 (9), 896–902.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diederich, A., J. Swait, and N. Wirsik (2012): “Citizen Participation in Patient Prioritization Policy Decisions: An Empirical and Experimental Study on Patients’ Characteristics”, PLOS ONE 7 (5), e36,824

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diederich, A., J. Winkelhage, M. Schnoor, and M. Schreier (2009): “Priorisierung. Öffentlicher Diskurs erforderlich”, Deutsches Ärzteblatt 106 (14), A654–656.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolan, P., R. Shaw, A. Tsuchiya, and A. Williams (2005): “QALY Maximisation and People’s Preferences: A Methodological Review of the Literature”, Health Economics 14 (2), 197–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, O. (2020): “Health Ministers Condemn Novartis Lottery for Zolgensma, the World’s Most Expensive Drug”, British Medical Journal 368, m580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egan, T. M., and R. M. Kotloff (2005): “Pro/Con Debate: Lung Allocation Should Be Based on Medical Urgency and Transplant Survival and not on Waiting Time”, CHEST 128 (1), 407–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleck, L. (2016): “Just Caring: Fair Innings and Priority Setting”, in E. Nagel, and M. Lauerer (eds.): Prioritization in Medicine: An International Dialogue, 197–216. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedrich, D. R., and B. Schöne-Seifert (2013): “Wirksamkeit und Nutzen bei der Priorisierung medizinischer Leistungen”, in B. Schmitz-Luhn, and A. Bohmeier (eds.): Priorisierung in der Medizin: Kriterien im Dialog, Kölner Schriften zum Medizinrecht, 31–36. Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gächter, S., H. Orzen, E. Renner, and C. Starmer (2009): “Are Experimental Economists Prone to Framing Effects? A Natural Field Experiment”, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 70 (3), 443–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gamliel, E., and E. Peer (2006): “Positive versus Negative Framing Affects Justice Judgments”, Social Justice Research 19 (3), 307–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gamliel, E., and E. Peer (2010): “Attribute Framing Affects the Perceived Fairness of Health Care Allocation Principles”, Judgment and Decision Making 5 (1), 11–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guyatt, G.H., D. J. Cook, D. King, G. R. Norman, S. L. Kane, and C. van Ineveld (1999): “Effect of the Framing of Questionnaire Items Regarding Satisfaction with Training on Residents’ Responses”, Academic Medicine 74 (2), 192–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ham, C. (1997): “Priority Setting in Health Care: Learning from International Experience”, Health Policy 42 (1), 49–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauck, K., P. C. Smith, and M. Goddard (2004): “The Economics of Priority Setting for Health Care: A Literature Review”, HNP discussion paper 28878. Washington: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirtz, D., S. Iannaccone, J. Heemskerk, K. Gwinn-Hardy, R. Moxley, and L. P. Rowland (2005): “Challenges and Opportunities in Clinical Trials for Spinal Muscular Atrophy”, Neurology 65 (9), 1352–1357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homans, G. C. (1958): “Social Behavior as Exchange”, American Journal of Sociology 63 (6), 597–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurley, J. (2000): “An Overview of the Normative Economics of the Health Sector”, in A. J. Culyer, and J. P. Newhouse (eds.): Handbook of Health Economics, vol. 1, 55–118. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johannesson, M., and P. O. Johansson (1996): “The Economics of Ageing: On the Attitude of Swedish People to the Distribution of Health Care Resources Between the Young and the Old”, Health Policy 37 (3), 153–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonsen, A. R. (1986): “Bentham in a Box: Technology Assessment and Health Care Allocation”, Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 14 (3–4), 172–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., and A. C. Kay (2010): “Social Justice: History, Theory, and Research”, in: Handbook of Social Psychology, vol. 2, 1122–1165, 5th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Konow, J. (1996): “A Positive Theory of Economic Fairness”, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 31 (1), 13–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konow, J. (2001): “Fair and Square: the Four Sides of Distributive Justice”, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 46 (2), 137–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konow, J. (2003): “Which is the Fairest One of All? A Positive Analysis of Justice Theories”, Journal of Economic Literature 41 (4), 1188–1239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kragt, M. E., and J. W. Bennett (2012): “Attribute Framing in Choice Experiments: How Do Attribute Level Descriptions Affect Value Estimates?”, Environmental and Resource Economics 51 (1), 43–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krütli, P., T. Rosemann, K. Y. Törnblom, and T. Smieszek (2016): “How to Fairly Allocate Scarce Medical Resources: Ethical Argumentation under Scrutiny by Health Professionals and Lay People”, PLOS ONE 11 (7), e0159,086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kühberger, A. (1998): “The Influence of Framing on Risky Decisions: A Meta-Analysis”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 75 (1), 23–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamont J., and C. Favor (2017): “Distributive Justice”, in E. N. Zalta (ed.): The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, winter 2017. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/justice-distributive/

  • Lerner, M. J. (1975): “The Justice Motive in Social Behavior: Introduction”, Journal of Social Issues 31 (3), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leventhal, G. S. (1976): “Fairness in Social Relations”, in J. Thibaut, J. T. Spence, and R. C. Carsob (eds.): Contemporary Topics in Social Psychology, 211–239. Morristown: General Learning Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liebig, S., and C. Sauer (2016): “Sociology of Justice”, in C. Sabbagh, and M. Schmitt (eds.): Handbook of Social Justice Theory and Research, 37–59. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mariotti G., et al. (2014): “Waiting Time Prioritisation for Specialist Services in Italy: The Homogeneous Waiting Time Groups Approach”, Health Policy 117 (1), 54–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKie, J., and J. Richardson (2003): “The Rule of Rescue”, Social Science and Medicine 56 (12), 2407–2419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKie, J., R. Hurworth, J. Richardson, and B. Shrimpton (2009): “Treatment Costs and Priority Setting in Health Care: A Qualitative Study”, Australia and New Zealand Health Policy 6, 11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menke, F. (2021): Provokanter Corona-Vorschlag: Ungeimpfte zur Kasse bitten. Westdeutscher Rundfunk. https://www1.wdr.de/nachrichten/themen/coronavirus/ungeimpfte-corona-kosten-102.html

  • Miller, D. (1979): Social Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mossialos, E., and D. King (1999): “Citizens and Rationing: Analysis of a European Survey”, Health Policy 49 (1), 75–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, H. (1938): Explorations in Personality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myllykangas, M., O. P. Ryynänen, J. Kinnunen, and J. Takala (1996): “Comparison of Doctors’, Nurses’, Politicians’ and Public Attitudes to Health Care Priorities”, Journal of Health Services Research and Policy 1 (4), 212–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niessen, L. W., E. W. M. Grijseels, and F. F. H Rutten (2000): “The Evidence-Based Approach in Health Policy and Health Care Delivery”, Social Science and Medicine 51 (6), 859–869.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nord, E., J. Richardson, A. Street, H. Kuhse, and P. Singer (1995): “Maximizing Health Benefits vs Egalitarianism: An Australian Survey of Health Issues”, Social Science and Medicine 41 (10), 1429–1437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nord, E., J. L. Pinto, J. Richardson, P. Menzel, and P. Ubel (1999): “Incorporating Societal Concerns for Fairness in Numerical Valuations of Health Programmes”, Health Economics 8 (1), 25–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nullmeier, F. (2020): “Towards a Theory of Need-Based Justice”, in S. Traub, and B. Kittel (eds.): Need-Based Distributive Justice: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, 191–208. Cham: Springer Nature.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oakes, J. M., and P. H. Rossi (2003): “The Measurement of SES in Health Research: Current Practice and Steps Toward a New Approach”, Social Science and Medicine 56 (4), 769–784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oedingen, C., T. Bartling, M. L. Dierks, A. C. Mühlbacher, H. Schrem, and C. Krauth (2020): “Public Preferences for the Allocation of Donor Organs for Transplantation: Focus Group Discussions”, Health Expectations 23 (3), 670–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, J. A. (1997): “Theories of Justice and their Implications for Priority Setting in Health Care”, Journal of Health Economics 16 (6), 625–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, J. A. (2017): Principles in Health Economics and Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pinho, M., and A. Pinto Borges (2018): “A Three-Country Survey of Public Attitudes Towards the Use of Rationing Criteria to Set Healthcare Priorities Between Patients”, International Journal of Ethics and Systems 34 (4), 472–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1971): A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Robert Koch-Institut (2022): Hinweise zur Testung von Patienten auf Infektion mit dem neuartigen Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Vorl_Testung_nCoV.html

  • Rodríguez, E., and J. L. Pinto (2000): “The Social Value of Health Programmes: Is Age a Relevant Factor?”, Health Economics 9 (7), 611–621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogge, J., and B. Kittel (2016): “Who Shall not Be Treated: Public Attitudes on Setting Health Care Priorities by Person-Based Criteria in 28 Nations”, PLOS ONE 11 (6), e0157,018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudan, I., L. Kapiriri, M. Tomlinson, M. Balliet, B. Cohen, and M. Chopra (2010): “Evidence-Based Priority Setting for Health Care and Research: Tools to Support Policy in Maternal, Neonatal, and Child Health in Africa”, PLOS Medicine 7 (7), e1000,308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryynänen, O. P., M. Myllykangas, J. Kinnunen, and J. Takala (1999): “Attitudes to Health Care Prioritisation Methods and Criteria among Nurses, Doctors, Politicians and the General Public”, Social Science and Medicine 49 (11), 1529–1539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabbagh, C. (2001): “A Taxonomy of Normative and Empirically Oriented Theories of Distributive Justice”, Social Justice Research 14 (3), 237–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabbagh, C., Y. Dar, and N. Resh (1994): “The Structure of Social Justice Judgments: A Facet Approach”, Social Psychology Quarterly 57 (3), 244–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabik, L. M., and R. K. Lie (2008): “Priority Setting in Health Care: Lessons from the Experiences of Eight Countries”, International Journal for Equity in Health 7, 4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, H. (2007): “Personal Responsibility for Health–Developments under the German Healthcare Reform 2007”, European Journal of Health Law 14 (3), 241–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schöne-Seifert, B., D. R. Friedrich, and A. Diederich (2012): “‘Leistungsbeschränkungen in der Medizin nach Maßgabe von Nutzen-Schwellen: Akzeptanz in der deutschen Bevölkerung?”, Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundsheitswesen 106 (6), 426–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreiber, H. L., and A. Haverich (2000): “Richtlinien für die Warteliste und für die Organvermittlung”, Deutsches Ärzteblatt 97 (7), A 385–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stumpf, S., S. Hecker, and H. Raspe (2014): “Kriterien für die Priorisierung medizinischer Leistungen im Licht eines regionalen Surveys–Ergebnisse und methodologische Fragen”, Das Gesundheitswesen 76 (4), 221–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Törnblom, K. (1988): “Positive and Negative Allocations: A Typology and a Model for Conflicting Justice Principles”, Advances in Group Processes 5, 141–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Törnblom, K., and E. Ahlin (1998): “Mode of Accomplishing Positive and Negative Outcomes: Its Effect on Fairness Evaluations”, Social Justice Research 11 (4), 423–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Törnblom, K., and A. Kazemi (2015): “Distributive Justice: Revisiting Past Statements and Reflecting on Future Prospects”, in R. S. Cropanzano, and M. L. Ambrose (eds.): The Oxford Handbook of Justice in the Workplace, 15–50. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsuchiya, A. (1999): “Age-Related Preferences and Age Weighting Health Benefits”, Social Science and Medicine 48 (2), 267–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsuchiya, A., P. Dolan, and R. Shaw (2003): “Measuring People’s Preferences Regarding Ageism in Health: Some Methodological Issues and some Fresh Evidence”, Social Science and Medicine 57 (4), 687–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., and D. J. Koehler (1994): “Support Theory: A Nonextensional Representation of Subjective Probability”, Psychological Review 101 (4), 547–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tymstra, T., and M. Andela (1993): “Opinions of Dutch Physicians, Nurses, and Citizens on Health Care Policy, Rationing, and Technology”, Journal of the American Medical Association 270 (24), 2995–2999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walster, E., E. Berscheid, and G. W. Walster (1973): “New Directions in Equity Research”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 25 (2), 151–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waring, D. R. (2004): Medical Benefit and the Human Lottery: An Egalitarian Approach to Patient Selection. Dordecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watters, S. M. (2016): “Fair Innings as a Basis for Prioritization: An Empirical Perspective”, in E. Nagel, and M. Lauerer (eds.): Prioritization in Medicine: An International Dialogue, 179–196. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegener, B., D. Mason, and International Social Justice Project (ISJP) (2010): International Social Justice Project, 1991 and 1996. Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06705.v2

  • Williams, A. (1997): “Intergenerational Equity: An Exploration of the ‘Fair Innings’ Argument”, Health Economics 6 (2), 117–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winkelhage, J., and A. Diederich (2012): “The Relevance of Personal Characteristics in Allocating Health Care Resources–Controversial Preferences of Laypersons with Different Educational Backgrounds”, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 9 (1), 223–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winkelhage, J., M. Schreier, and A. Diederich (2013): “Priority Setting in Health Care: Attitudes of Physicians and Patients”, Health 5 (4), 712–719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winkler, J., and H. Stolzenberg (1999): “Der Sozialschichtindex im Bundes-Gesundheitssurvey”, Das Gesundheitswesen 61 (Sonderheft 2), S178–S183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wirsik, N., A. Diederich, and M. Schreier (2009): “Coinjont-Analyse: Prätest zur Evaluation von patientenbezogenen Merkmalen und dem Einfluss von Proxies auf die Bildung der Rangfolge”, FOR 655 Working Paper 22/2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe (1996): The Ljubljana Charter on Reforming Health Care in Europe. Technical documents. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/347612

  • Wujciak, T., and G. Opelz (1993a): “Computer Analysis of Cadaver Kidney Allocation Procedures”, Transplantation 55 (3), 516–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wujciak, T., and G. Opelz (1993b): “A Proposal for Improved Cadaver Kidney Allocation”, Transplantation 56 (6), 1513–1517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The chapter presents results from the project “Framing in need determination,” funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG) (DI506 13–2). It was part of the DFG research group FOR 2104 “Need-based Justice and Distributive Procedures.”

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany

    Adele Diederich

  2. University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany

    Marc Wyszynski

Authors
  1. Adele Diederich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marc Wyszynski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adele Diederich .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economic Sociology, University of Vienna, Wien, Austria

    Bernhard Kittel

  2. Department of Economics and Social Science, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg, Germany

    Stefan Traub

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Diederich, A., Wyszynski, M. (2024). Justice Principles, Prioritization in the Healthcare Sector, and the Effect of Framing. In: Kittel, B., Traub, S. (eds) Priority of Needs?. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53051-7_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation