Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 General trends in the field of health care judicialization and equity in Latin America

From: Is the judicialization of health care bad for equity? A scoping review

Variables Values
Type of study N of Authors Single author: 7 (20%)
Two authors: 14 (40%)
More than 2 authors: 14 (40%)
Type of Publication Article: 27 (77%)
Chapter in an Edited Volume: 7 (20%)
Policy Report: 1 (3%)
Journal or Book title Public health journals: 16 (46%)
Law and public policy journals: 11 (31%)
Other: 8 (23%)
Year 2006–2010: 6 (17%)
2011–2014: 23 (66%)
2014–2018: 6 (17%)
Language English: 22 (63%)
Spanish: 7 (20%)
Portuguese: 6 (17%)
Interdisciplinary Interdisciplinary: 10 (28%)
Disciplinary: 25 (72%)
Cases of judicialization Country Only Brazil: 19 (54%)
Only Colombia: 8 (23%)
Only Argentina: 3 (9%)
Other single or multiple countries: 5 (14%)
Empirical Equity Impact Assesment Provides empirical data and analysis: 24 (69%)
Theoretical or descriptive: 11 (31%)
Comparative Comparative: 4 (11%)
Single case: 31 (89%)
Dynamic perspective Patterns over time: 6 (17%)
Static: 29 (83%)
Type of Court Highest court: 9 (26%)
Lower courts: 20 (57%)
Both or N/A: 6 (17%)
Entitlements Only medicines: 14 (40%)
Other medical treatments: 21 (60%)
Study design Methods Quantitative (models): 0 (0%)
Descriptive statistics: 26 (74%)
Qualitative: 9 (26%)
Methods section: 19 (54%)
No methods section: 16 (46%)
Variables Litigants’ demographics: 20 (57%)
Type of legal representation: 19 (54%)
Type of claims: 26 (75%)
Prices or costs of litigation: 11 (31%)
Dataset Totally constructed by the author(s): 20 (57%)
Other: 15 (43%)
Effect on equity Positive: 7 (20%)
Negative: 17 (49%)
Ambiguous: 11 (31%)