ArticleHealth care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy2026
Severity as a Criterion for Prioritizing Diagnostic Measures.
Article in Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The extent to which a condition is severe constitutes an important part of several approaches to healthcare priority setting. For example, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and the UK are all countries with explicit criteria for priority setting that apply severity as one of their considerations. However, these criteria are mainly applied to treatments rather than diagnostic measures. When the criterion of severity is applied to treatments, it is often applied as follows: the more severe the condition targeted by a treatment, the higher the cost that can be accepted per health improvement. However, applying this approach to diagnostic measures gives rise to at least three challenges. First, the issue of heterogeneity, while treatments may often be indicated for a specific patient population, diagnostic measures often target larger segments of patients. Second, the issue of secondary findings, the fact that diagnostic measures may generate secondary findings. Third, the issue of (non)-treatability, the fact that there are conditions for which there are diagnostic measures but not (yet) any treatment options. The aim of this paper is to explore these challenges. This exploration involves making sense of them from a decision-making perspective which, in turn, reveals a number of characteristic features about the notion of severity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41739376What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.