BACKGROUND In 2006, researchers and decision-makers launched a five-year project - Response to Accountable Priority Setting for Trust in Health Systems (REACT) - to improve planning and priority-setting through implementing the Accountability for Reasonableness framework in Mbarali District, Tanzania. The objective of this paper is to explore the acceptability of Accountability for Reasonablene...

BACKGROUND Priority setting in every health system is complex and difficult. In less wealthy countries the dominant approach to priority setting has been Burden of Disease (BOD) and cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), which is helpful, but insufficient because it focuses on a narrow range of values - need and efficiency - and not the full range of relevant values, including legitimacy and fairne...

Two notions of accountability embodied in proposals to reform managed care have different ethical implications. Market accountability requires plans to inform purchasers and consumers about performance and options, in theory legitimizing limits to care through consumer choice. Recognizing the limits of consumer choice, accountability for reasonableness requires that the rationales for limits to...

service Email alerting the top right corner of the article Receive free email alerts when new articles cite this article-sign up in the box at

Fairness is a key goal of priority setting and ‘accountability for reasonableness’ has emerged as the leading framework for fair priority setting. However, it has not been shown acceptable to those engaged in priority setting. In particular, since it was developed in the context of a primarily privately funded health system, its applicability in a primarily publicly funded system is uncertain. ...

Democratic societies find it difficult to reach consensus concerning principles for healthcare distribution in the face of resource constraints. At the same time the need for legitimacy of allocation decisions has been recognised. Against this background, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) aspires to meet the principles of procedural justice, specifically the condi...

BACKGROUND Priority setting, also known as rationing or resource allocation, occurs at all levels of every health care system. Daniels and Sabin have proposed a framework for priority setting in health care institutions called 'accountability for reasonableness', which links priority setting to theories of democratic deliberation. Fairness is a key goal of priority setting. According to 'accoun...

in the editorial published in this journal, daniels and colleagues argue that his and sabin’s accountability for reasonableness (a4r) framework should be used to handle ethical issues in the health technology assessment (hta)-process, especially concerning fairness. in contrast to this suggestion, it is argued that such an approach risks suffering from the irrrelevance or insufficiency they war...