Article Text
Filler
Should Health Screening Be Private?
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Jim Thornton, London, Institute of Economic Affairs, 1999, 65 pages, £5.
Jim Thornton gives us in this book a range of arguments against the state funding of nearly all adult health-related screening programmes but for most screening programmes for children and the handicapped. He justifies the first on the basis of consumers being the best judges of their health preferences and adult screening being largely ineffective. He justifies the second on the basis of the belief that neonatal and childhood screening is more effective and that the state has a duty to decide on behalf of those who are not competent …
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Managing health problems in people with intellectual disabilities
- Temporal trend in socioeconomic inequalities in the uptake of cancer screening programmes in France between 2005 and 2010: results from the Cancer Barometer surveys
- Perspectives of non-attenders for cervical cancer screening in Norway: a qualitative focus group study
- Factors associated with participation in cervical cancer screening among young Koreans: a nationwide cross-sectional study
- Self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Life-course socioeconomic status and breast and cervical cancer screening: analysis of the WHO's Study on Global Ageing and Adult Health (SAGE)
- The inverse equity hypothesis: Does it apply to coverage of cancer screening in middle-income countries?
- Examining policy cohesion for cervical cancer worldwide: analysis of WHO country reports
- The role of community health workers in cervical cancer screening in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic scoping review of the literature
- The impact of scaling up cervical cancer screening and treatment services among women living with HIV in Kenya: a modelling study