医疗伤害无过错赔偿制度综述

A. Farrell, S. Devaney, A. Dar
{"title":"医疗伤害无过错赔偿制度综述","authors":"A. Farrell, S. Devaney, A. Dar","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2221836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This report was commissioned by the No-Fault Compensation Review Group in Scotland. It provides an up-to-date analysis of existing no-fault schemes in New Zealand, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and Finland, as well as limited schemes which operate in Virginia and Florida in the United States. Drawing on such analysis, the report considers a number of specific elements such as the advantages and disadvantages of no-fault schemes; choice of model; equality of coverage; cost and affordability; access to justice; and linkages to patient complaints processes, professional accountability and patient safety. The report was designed to assist the Group in its deliberations on whether a no-fault compensation scheme for medical injury should be established in Scotland. The Group’s report setting out its findings and recommendations was published in 2011.","PeriodicalId":410798,"journal":{"name":"Medical-Legal Studies eJournal","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"No-Fault Compensation Schemes for Medical Injury: A Review\",\"authors\":\"A. Farrell, S. Devaney, A. Dar\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2221836\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This report was commissioned by the No-Fault Compensation Review Group in Scotland. It provides an up-to-date analysis of existing no-fault schemes in New Zealand, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and Finland, as well as limited schemes which operate in Virginia and Florida in the United States. Drawing on such analysis, the report considers a number of specific elements such as the advantages and disadvantages of no-fault schemes; choice of model; equality of coverage; cost and affordability; access to justice; and linkages to patient complaints processes, professional accountability and patient safety. The report was designed to assist the Group in its deliberations on whether a no-fault compensation scheme for medical injury should be established in Scotland. The Group’s report setting out its findings and recommendations was published in 2011.\",\"PeriodicalId\":410798,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical-Legal Studies eJournal\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-01-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"19\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical-Legal Studies eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2221836\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical-Legal Studies eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2221836","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

摘要

这份报告是由苏格兰无过失赔偿审查小组委托编写的。它提供了新西兰、瑞典、丹麦、挪威和芬兰现有的无故障方案的最新分析,以及在美国弗吉尼亚州和佛罗里达州运行的有限方案。根据这种分析,报告考虑了一些具体因素,例如无故障方案的优点和缺点;模型的选择;覆盖面平等;成本和负担能力;诉诸司法;以及与患者投诉流程、专业问责制和患者安全的联系。该报告旨在协助工作组审议是否应在苏格兰建立医疗伤害无过错赔偿计划。该小组的报告列出了其调查结果和建议,并于2011年发表。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
No-Fault Compensation Schemes for Medical Injury: A Review
This report was commissioned by the No-Fault Compensation Review Group in Scotland. It provides an up-to-date analysis of existing no-fault schemes in New Zealand, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and Finland, as well as limited schemes which operate in Virginia and Florida in the United States. Drawing on such analysis, the report considers a number of specific elements such as the advantages and disadvantages of no-fault schemes; choice of model; equality of coverage; cost and affordability; access to justice; and linkages to patient complaints processes, professional accountability and patient safety. The report was designed to assist the Group in its deliberations on whether a no-fault compensation scheme for medical injury should be established in Scotland. The Group’s report setting out its findings and recommendations was published in 2011.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Who Gets Medication-assisted Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder, and Does It Reduce Overdose Risk? Evidence from the Rhode Island All-payer Claims Database The Architecture Behind the Malpractice Concept Guidelines Tax Evasion and Illicit Cigarettes in California: Part I – Survey Evidence on Current Behavior Regulatory Exclusivity Revision: Working to Achieve Greater Innovation in Approved New Molecular Entities Leviathan in the Commons: Biomedical Data and the State
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1