Article Text
PDFLaw, ethics and medicine
Paper
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence appraisal and ageism
Abstract
The requirements of the UK Equality Act 2010 and some high profile criticism for using a potentially ageist methodology have prompted the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) to assess the processes and methodology it uses to make appraisal decisions. This paper argues that NICE has established rigorous systems to protect against ageist decisions, has no track record of ageism and is well placed to meet the requirements of new UK equality legislation.
- Clinical ethics
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Competing interests None.
Patient consent Obtained.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Linked Articles
- Commentary
- The concise argument
Other content recommended for you
- National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgments
- NICE’s end of life decision making scheme: impact on population health
- Not a NICE fallacy: a reply to Dr Quigley
- Ageism and equality
- Cost-effectiveness of insulin pumps compared with multiple daily injections both provided with structured education for adults with type 1 diabetes: a health economic analysis of the Relative Effectiveness of Pumps over Structured Education (REPOSE) randomised controlled trial
- Intermittent self catheterisation with hydrophilic, gel reservoir, and non-coated catheters: a systematic review and cost effectiveness analysis
- A guide to health economic evaluations
- NICE rules that drug used in advanced liver cancer is not cost effective for the NHS
- Tilt testing is more cost-effective than implantable loop recorder monitoring as a means of directing pacing therapy in people with recurrent episodes of suspected vasovagal syncope that affect their quality of life or present a high risk of injury
- NICE discrimination