Power, politics, and health spending priorities

Virtual Mentor

Volumn 14, Issue 11, 2012, Pages 885-889

  Gusmano, Michael K ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HUMAN; POLITICS; UNITED STATES;

HEALTH EXPENDITURES; HEALTH PRIORITIES; HUMANS; POLITICS; POWER (PSYCHOLOGY); UNITED STATES;

EID: 84882247799     PISSN: 19377010     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2012.14.11.msoc1-1211     Document Type: Review

References (18)

1. Chau PH, Woo J, Chan KC, Weisz D, Gusmano MK. Avoidable mortality pattern in a Chinese population-Hong Kong. Eur J Pub Health. 2011;21(1):215-220.
2. Nolte E, McKee CM. Measuring the health of nations: updating an earlier analysis. Health Aff (Millwood). 2008;27(1):58-71.
3. Weisz D, Gusmano MK, Rodwin VG, Neuberg L. Population health and the health system: a comparative analysis of avoidable mortality in three nations and their world cities. Eur J Pub Health. 2008;18(2):166-172.
4. Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care web site. http://www.dartmouthatlas.org. Accessed on October 3, 2012.
5. Cutler DM, McClellan M. Is technological change in medicine worth it? Health Aff (Millwood). 2001;20(5):11-29.
6. Rubin JB, Paltiel AD, Saltzman WM. Are we studying what matters? Health priorities and NIH-funded biomedical engineering research. Ann Biomed Eng. 2010;38(7):2237–2251.
7. Carter AJR, Nguyen CN. A comparison of cancer burden and research spending reveals discrepancies in the distribution of research funding. BMC Public Health. 2012;12(1):526. http://www.biomedcentral.com/14712458/12/526. Accessed October 3, 2012.
8. McGinnis JM, Williams-Russo P, Knickman JR. The case for more active policy attention to health promotion. Health Aff (Millwood). 2002;21(2):78-93.
9. Gusmano MK, Rodwin VG, Weisz D. Health Care in World Cities: New York, London, and Paris. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2010.
10. Berenson RA, Rich EC. US approaches to physician payment: the deconstruction of primary care. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25(6):613-618.
11. Wiist W. Citizens United, public health, and democracy: the Supreme Court ruling, its implications, and proposed action. Am J Public Health. 2010;101(7):1172-1179.
12. Hedge D, Sampat B. Interest groups, Congress, and federal funding for science. 2011. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1962937. Accessed on August 20, 2012.
13. Gusmano MK. The U.S. health care system’s uneasy relationship with primary care. Italian J Public Health. 2010;7(4): 344-349.
14. Evans CJ, McGaha AC. A survey of mental health consumers’ and family members’ involvement in advocacy. Community Ment Health J. 1998;34(6):615-623.
15. Petersen-Perlman N. Mental health parity bill gains steam in Congress. Star Tribune. November 1, 2007. http://www.startribune.com/templates/Print_This_Story?sid=11615431. Accessed October 3, 2012.
16. Callahan D. Shaping biomedical research priorities: the case of the National Institutes of Health. Health Care Analysis. 1999;7(2):115-129.
17. Gutmann A, Thompson D. Democracy and Disagreement: Why Moral Conflict Cannot be Avoided in Politics, and What Should be Done about It. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1998.
18. Grogan CM, Gusmano MK. Healthy Voices, Unhealthy Silence: Advocacy and Health Policy for the Poor. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press; 2007:25.