Criteria for the procedural fairness of health financing decisions: a scoping review.

Due to constraints on institutional capacity and financial resources, the road to universal health coverage (UHC) involves difficult policy choices. To assist with these choices, scholars and policy makers have done extensive work on criteria to assess the substantive fairness of health financing policies: their impact on the distribution of rights, duties, benefits and burdens on the path towards UHC. However, less attention has been paid to the procedural fairness of health financing decisions.

Pharmaceutical policies: effects of educational or regulatory policies targeting prescribers.

Background: Pharmaceuticals make an important contribution to people's health. Medicines, however, are frequently not used appropriately. Improving the use of medicines can improve health outcomes and save resources.

Estimating QALY gains in applied studies: a review of cost-utility analyses published in 2010.

Reimbursement agencies in several countries now require health outcomes to be measured in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), leading to an immense increase in publications reporting QALY gains. However, there is a growing concern that the various 'multi-attribute utility' (MAU) instruments designed to measure the Q in the QALY yield disparate values, implying that results from different instruments are incommensurable. By reviewing cost-utility analyses published in 2010, we aim to contribute to improved knowledge on how QALYs are currently calculated in applied analyses; how transparently QALY measurement is presented; and how large the expected incremental QALY gains are.

[Do patients participate in the development of clinical guidelines in Norway?].

Background: The National Health Plan (2007-2010) establishes that users should participate in development of all parts of the health services. We have investigated whether and how patients participate in development of guidelines in Norway.

Material And Methods: Nine doctors and one nurse, trained in the AGREE instrument (an international tool for evaluation of clinical guidelines), evaluated patient involvement in development of key guidelines in Norway, on a scale from 1 (patient views not mentioned) to 4 (patients participate).