Does accountability for reasonableness work? A protocol for a mixed methods study using an audit tool to evaluate the decision-making of clinical commissioning groups in England
Introduction Clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) in England are tasked with making difficult decisions on which healthcare services to provide against the background of limited budgets. The question is how to ensure that these decisions are fair and legitimate. Accounts of what constitutes fair and...
Saved in:
Main Authors: | Sarah Clark, Katharina Kieslich, Peter Littlejohns, Albert Weale |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2015-07-01
|
Series: | BMJ Open |
Online Access: | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/7/e007908.full |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Similar Items
-
EMOTIONS AND REASONING IN MORAL DECISION MAKING
by: V. V. Nadurak
Published: (2016-12-01) -
ENHANCING ACCOUNTABILITY FOR MAKING CITIES RESILIENT AND ROLE OF SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS
by: Arife Coşkun, et al.
Published: (2017-06-01) -
Does audit fee stickiness and audit quality are reciprocal?
by: Slamet Wahyudi
Published: (2024-09-01) -
Influence of Trust, Time Pressure and Complexity Factors in Judgment and Decision-Making in Auditing
by: Cleston Santos, et al.
Published: (2021-01-01) -
Contracting account audit on social networks
by: Jakovljević Nemanja, et al.
Published: (2022-01-01)