000			04407cam a22006498i 4500
001			9781315149165
003			FlBoTFG
005			20240213122834.0
006			m o d
007			cr |||||||||||
008			210812s2022 enk ob 001 0 eng
040			_aOCoLC-P _beng _erda _cOCoLC-P
020			_a9781315149165 _q(ebook)
020			_a1315149168
020			_a9781351371315 _q(electronic bk. : EPUB)
020			_a1351371312 _q(electronic bk. : EPUB)
020			_a9781351371308 _q(electronic bk. : Mobipocket)
020			_a1351371304 _q(electronic bk. : Mobipocket)
020			_a9781351371322 _q(electronic bk. : PDF)
020			_a1351371320 _q(electronic bk. : PDF)
020			_z9781138554757 _q(hardback)
020			_z9781032184913 _q(paperback)
035			_a(OCoLC)1266197271
035			_a(OCoLC-P)1266197271
050	0	0	_aK3601
072		7	_aBUS _x051000 _2bisacsh
072		7	_aLAW _x000000 _2bisacsh
072		7	_aLAW _x016000 _2bisacsh
072		7	_aLNTM _2bicssc
082	0	0	_a344.04/1 _223
100	1		_aWang, Daniel Wei Liang, _eauthor.
245	1	0	_aHealth technology assessment, courts and the right to healthcare / _cDaniel Wei Liang Wang.
264		1	_aAbingdon, Oxon ; _aNew York, NY : _bRoutledge, _c2022.
300			_a1 online resource
336			_atext _btxt _2rdacontent
337			_acomputer _bc _2rdamedia
338			_aonline resource _bcr _2rdacarrier
505	0		_aIntroduction -- Priority-setting and the right to healthcare : synergies and tensions on the path to universal health coverage -- Priority-setting and health technology assessment -- Brazil : right to healthcare litigation : the problem and the institutional responses -- Colombia : demanding but undermining fair priority-setting via courts -- England :from Wednesbury unreasonableness to accountability for reasonableness -- Conclusion : institutionalizing, controlling, limiting and circumventing HTA via courts.
520			_a"Both developing and developed countries face an increasing mismatch between what patients expect to receive from healthcare and what the public healthcare systems can afford to provide. Where there has been a growing recognition of the entitlement to receive healthcare, the frustrated expectations with regards to the level of provision has led to lawsuits challenging the denial of funding for health treatments by public health systems. This book analyses the impact of courts and litigation on the way health systems set priorities and make rationing decisions. In particular, it focuses on how the judicial protection of the right to healthcare can impact the institutionalization, functioning and centrality of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) for decisions about the funding of treatment. Based on the case study of three jurisdictions - Brazil, Colombia, and England - it shows that courts can be a key driver for the institutionalization of HTA. These case studies show the paradoxes of judicial control, which can promote accountability and impair it, demand administrative competence and undermine bureaucratic capacities. The case studies offer a nuanced and evidence-informed understanding of these paradoxes in the context of health care by showing how the judicial control of priority-setting decisions in health care can be used to require and control an explicit scheme for health technology assessment, but can also limit and circumvent it"-- _cProvided by publisher.
588			_aOCLC-licensed vendor bibliographic record.
650		0	_aMedical care _xLaw and legislation _zEngland.
650		0	_aMedical care _xLaw and legislation _zBrazil.
650		0	_aMedical care _xLaw and legislation _zColombia.
650		0	_aMedical care _zEngland _xDecision making.
650		0	_aMedical care _zBrazil _xDecision making.
650		0	_aMedical care _zColombia _xDecision making.
650		0	_aJudicial process _zEngland.
650		0	_aJudicial process _zBrazil.
650		0	_aJudicial process _zColombia.
650		0	_aRight to health _xCases.
650		7	_aBUSINESS & ECONOMICS / Public Finance _2bisacsh
650		7	_aLAW / General _2bisacsh
650		7	_aLAW / Comparative _2bisacsh
653			_aHealth technology assessment
856	4	0	_3Taylor & Francis _uhttps://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781315149165
856	4	2	_3OCLC metadata license agreement _uhttp://www.oclc.org/content/dam/oclc/forms/terms/vbrl-201703.pdf
999			_c6301 _d6301