Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2440/74463
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHofmann, B.-
dc.contributor.authorSaarni, S.-
dc.contributor.authorBraunack-Mayer, A.-
dc.contributor.authorvan der Wilt, G.-
dc.date.issued2012-
dc.identifier.citationInternational Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 2012; 28(2):196-197-
dc.identifier.issn0266-4623-
dc.identifier.issn1471-6348-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/74463-
dc.description.abstractKathrin Dengler and Uta Bittner demand a full-fledged philosophy of values in our empirical study of various methods for ethical analysis in health technology assessment (HTA). This may be like putting the classification of disease on hold until the concept of disease is clarified, or postponing the development of health care until the term “health” is clarified. As Dengler and Bittner rightly point out, the term value has many meanings, and as they properly recognize: “[P]hilosophically, the definition of what is meant by ‘a good life’ or ‘well-being’ is a very challenging project.” Hence, it may be a bit over the top to crave that we solve eternal issues in an empirical article on methodology.-
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityBjørn Hofmann, Samuli I. Saarni, Annette Braunack-Mayer and Gert Jan van der Wilt-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisherCambridge Univ Press-
dc.rights© Cambridge University Press 2012-
dc.source.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0266462312000165-
dc.titleTo evaluate versus to know the value of everything-
dc.typeJournal article-
dc.identifier.doi10.1017/S0266462312000165-
pubs.publication-statusPublished-
dc.identifier.orcidBraunack-Mayer, A. [0000-0003-4427-0224]-
Appears in Collections:Aurora harvest
General Practice publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.