Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Feb:198:27-35.
doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.12.012. Epub 2017 Dec 14.

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

Affiliations

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

Vadim Dukhanin et al. Soc Sci Med. 2018 Feb.

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.

Keywords: Economic evaluation; Equity weighting; Fairness; Healthcare policy; Multicriteria decision analysis; Priority setting; Social justice; Systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Flow diagram describing selection of publications

References

    1. Al-Janabi H, Flynn T, & Coast J, 2012. Development of a self-report measure of capability wellbeing for adults: The ICECAP-A. Qual Life Res. 21(1), 167–176. doi:10.1007/s11136-011-9927-2. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Asaria M, Griffin S, Cookson R, Whyte S, & Tappenden P, 2015a. Distributional cost-effectiveness analysis of health care programmes - A methodological case study of the UK bowel cancer screening programme. Health Econ. 24(6), 742–754. doi:10.1002/hec.3058. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Asaria M, Griffin S, & Cookson R, 2015b. Distributional cost-effectiveness analysis: A tutorial. Med Decis Making. 36(1), 8–19. doi:0272989X15583266. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Assasi N, Schwartz L, Tarride JE, O’Reilly D, & Goeree R, 2015. Barriers and facilitators influencing ethical evaluation in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 31(3), 113–23. doi:10.1017/S026646231500032X. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Assasi N, Schwartz L, Tarride JE, Campbell K, & Goeree R, 2014. Methodological guidance documents for evaluation of ethical considerations in health technology assessment: A systematic review. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 14(2), 203–20. doi:10.1586/14737167.2014.894464. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types