English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Health councils have developed in Brazil in keeping with arrangements under the 1988 Constitution, and the logic of their political consensus has expanded among interest groups relevant to public policy. Collegiate bodies, such as intergovernmental commissions, represent an extension of that logic to executive relationships and also express political intermediation by expertise, following the tradition of the European Welfare State. The state technical bureaucracy has thus developed a remarkable role in policy-making and in State-level modeling of interest groups. This article argues that such collegiate bodies should be analyzed through State action and defines two models for health councils. One, the vocal political model, is characterized by a prevalence of outspoken denunciation and an overload of demands on the political agenda. The other, the consensus model, expresses self-limitation amongst interest groups in drafting demands. These models are not hierarchically fixed and are usually linked to the political platforms of interest groups participating in the collegiate bodies.

Conselhos de saúde, comissões intergestores e grupos de interesses no Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS)