From: SARS and hospital priority setting: a qualitative case study and evaluation
Relevance | Rationales for priority setting decisions must rest on reasons (evidence and principles) that 'fair-minded' people can agree are relevant in the context. 'Fair-minded people seek to cooperate according to terms they can justify to each other – this narrows, though does not eliminate, the scope of controversy, which is further narrowed by specifying that reasons must be relevant to the specific priority setting context. |
Publicity | Priority setting decisions and their rationales must be publicly accessible. |
Revision/Appeals | There must be a mechanism for challenge, including the opportunity for revising decisions in light of considerations that stakeholders may raise. |
Enforcement | There is either voluntary or public regulation of the process to ensure that the first three conditions are met. |