Feature Rationing Why Oregon went wrong BMJ 2008; 337 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a2044 (Published 14 October 2008) Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a2044 Article Related content Metrics Responses Peer review Related articles Analysis Accountability for reasonableness: an update Published: 09 October 2008; BMJ 337 doi:10.1136/bmj.a1850 Analysis Moving forward on rationing: an economic view Published: 09 October 2008; BMJ 337 doi:10.1136/bmj.a1872 Analysis Clinical priority setting Published: 09 October 2008; BMJ 337 doi:10.1136/bmj.a1846 Correction Why Oregon went wrong Published: 13 January 2009; BMJ 338 doi:10.1136/bmj.b78 See more “Big Gene” industry in the NHS—does this represent good value? BMJ December 01, 2023, 383 p1921; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.p1921 Conflicting interests undermine our trust in COP28 BMJ December 01, 2023, 383 p2855; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.p2855 When I use a word . . . Medicines regulation—Patent medicines BMJ December 01, 2023, 383 p2854; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.p2854 Consultant pay offer: Will early career doctors lose out? BMJ December 01, 2023, 383 p2851; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.p2851 GPs in Scotland reject call for “fully salaried GP service” BMJ December 01, 2023, 383 p2853; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.p2853
