There were dry wells and sandstorms to keep you humble, lifelong friends to take your side, and churches to remind us that every soul is equal in value and equal in need.
In the literature regarding the conceptualisation of equity, some common ground can be found by the recognition of three domains: 1°, equal access to care for people in equal need 2°, equal treatment for people in equal need and 3°, equal treatment outcomes for people in equal need.
At an impressionable age, I learned "ins" need to equal "outs".
Concerning the range of services provided, the aspect "availability of equal services for people in equal need" is widespread in the literature on equity [ 6, 7].
Neither the availability of equal services nor equal quality of services for people in equal need is addressed in the selected papers, nor is the aspect of variations in personal inconvenience, cost or availability of information for patients from different backgrounds.
In this evaluation, a theory-based framework conceptualising equity in terms of equal access, equal treatment and equal treatment outcomes for people in equal need is used to guide the work.
Equal access for equal need (in its clinical programmes) and an explicit objective to targeting disadvantaged groups (in its public health and possibly newly introduced social care programmes) are key driving principles for NICE [ 21, 22].
Those in equal need and with equal opportunities to access health care may not make equal use of those opportunities.
EQS explicitly distances itself from the concept of 'cultural competence', instead highlighting Whitehead's definition of equity in health: "equal access to available care for equal need; equal utilization for equal need; equal quality of care for all" [ 26].
In Canada this means equal access (or equal service) for equal need [ 1].
