LIVIVO - The Search Portal for Life Sciences

zur deutschen Oberfläche wechseln
Advanced search

Search results

Result 1 - 8 of total 8

Search options

  1. Article ; Online: COVID-19

    Richard Huxtable

    BMC Medical Ethics, Vol 21, Iss 1, Pp 1-

    where is the national ethical guidance?

    2020  Volume 3

    Keywords COVID-19 ; Coronavirus ; Ethical guidance ; Professional guidance ; Medical philosophy. Medical ethics ; R723-726 ; covid19
    Language English
    Publishing date 2020-05-01T00:00:00Z
    Publisher BMC
    Document type Article ; Online
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    More links

    Kategorien

  2. Article ; Online: Bin it or pin it? Which professional ethical guidance on managing COVID-19 should I follow?

    Richard Huxtable

    BMC Medical Ethics, Vol 21, Iss 1, Pp 1-

    2020  Volume 10

    Abstract: Abstract Background As the COVID-19 (coronavirus) pandemic develops, healthcare professionals are looking for support with, and guidance to inform, the difficult decisions they face. In the (current) absence of an authoritative national steer in England, ...

    Abstract Abstract Background As the COVID-19 (coronavirus) pandemic develops, healthcare professionals are looking for support with, and guidance to inform, the difficult decisions they face. In the (current) absence of an authoritative national steer in England, professional bodies and local organisations have been developing and disseminating their own ethical guidance. Questions inevitably arise, some of which are particularly pressing during the pandemic, as events are unfolding quickly and the field is becoming crowded. My central question here is: which professional ethical guidance should the professional follow? Main body Adopting a working definition of “professional ethical guidance”, I offer three domains for a healthcare professional to consider, and some associated questions to ask, when determining whether – in relation to any guidance document – they should “bin it or pin it”. First, the professional should consider the source of the guidance: is the issuing body authoritative or, if not, at least sufficiently influential that its guidance should be followed? Second, the professional should consider the applicability of the guidance, ascertaining whether the guidance is available and, if so, whether it is pertinent. Pertinence has various dimensions, including whether the guidance applies to this professional, this patient and/or this setting, whether it is up-to-date, and whether the guidance addresses the situation the professional is facing. Third, the professional should consider the methodology and methods by which the guidance was produced. Although the substantive quality of the guidance is important, so too are the methods by which it was produced. Here, the professional should ask whether the guidance is sufficiently inclusive – in terms of who has prepared it and who contributed to its development – and whether it was rigorously developed, and thus utilised appropriate processes, principles and evidence. Conclusion Asking and answering such questions may be challenging, particularly during a pandemic. Furthermore, guidance will not do all the work: professionals will still need to exercise their judgment in deciding what is best in the individual case, whether or not this concerns COVID-19. But such judgments can and should be informed (and constrained) by guidance, and hopefully these preliminary observations will provide some useful pointers for time-pressed professionals.
    Keywords COVID-19 ; Coronavirus ; Ethical guidance ; Professional guidance ; Medical philosophy. Medical ethics ; R723-726 ; covid19
    Subject code 170
    Language English
    Publishing date 2020-07-01T00:00:00Z
    Publisher BMC
    Document type Article ; Online
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    More links

    Kategorien

  3. Article ; Online: Protocol for a scoping review to understand what is known about how GPs make decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity

    Richard Huxtable / Simon Jack Ogden

    BMJ Open, Vol 10, Iss

    2020  Volume 10

    Abstract: Introduction General Practitioners (GPs) and allied healthcare professionals working in primary care are regularly required to make decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity. In England and Wales, these decisions are made for ... ...

    Abstract Introduction General Practitioners (GPs) and allied healthcare professionals working in primary care are regularly required to make decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity. In England and Wales, these decisions are made for incapacitated adult patients under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, which primarily requires that decisions are made in the patient’s ‘best interests’. Regarding children, decisions are also made in their best interests but are done so under the Children Act 1989, which places paramount importance on the welfare of the child. Decisions for children are usually made by parents, but a GP may become involved if he or she feels a parent is not acting in the best interests of the child. Internationally, including elsewhere in the UK, different approaches are taken. We hypothesise that, despite the legislation and professional guidelines, there are many different approaches taken by GPs and allied healthcare professionals in England and Wales when making these complex decisions with, for and on behalf of patients who lack capacity. To better understand what is known about how these decisions are made, we plan to undertake a scoping review and directed content analysis of the literature. While the majority of decisions made in primary care are made by GPs, for completeness, this review will include all allied healthcare professionals working in primary care.Methods and analysis To ensure a wide breadth of literature is captured, a scoping review will be undertaken as described by Arksey and O’Malley (2005). A five-stage approach will be taken when conducting this review: (1) identifying the research question; (2) identifying relevant papers; (3) study selection; (4) data extraction and (5) summarising and synthesis. The final stage will include a directed content analysis of the data to help establish the cross-cutting themes.Ethics and dissemination The scoping review will be disseminated through conferences and peer-reviewed publications. This scoping review is the first ...
    Keywords Medicine ; R
    Subject code 360
    Language English
    Publishing date 2020-10-01T00:00:00Z
    Publisher BMJ Publishing Group
    Document type Article ; Online
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    More links

    Kategorien

  4. Article ; Online: ‘You don’t Need Proof When You’ve Got Instinct!’

    Ruud Meulen, ter / Richard Huxtable

    Gut Feelings and Some Limits to Parental Authority

    2015  

    Abstract: This book reflects on the many contributions made in and to European bioethics to date, in various locations, and from various disciplinary perspectives. In so doing, the book advances understanding of the academic and social status of European bioethics ...

    Abstract This book reflects on the many contributions made in and to European bioethics to date, in various locations, and from various disciplinary perspectives. In so doing, the book advances understanding of the academic and social status of European bioethics as it is being supported and practiced by various disciplines such as philosophy, law, medicine, and the social sciences, applied to a wide range of areas. The European focus offers a valuable counter-balance to an often prominent US understanding of bioethics. The volume is split into four parts. The first contains reflection on bioethics in the past, present and future, and also considers how comparison between countries and disciplines can enrich bioethical discourse. The second looks at bioethics in particular locations and contexts, including: policy, boardrooms and courtrooms; studios and virtual rooms; and society, while the third part explores the translation of theories and concepts of bioethics into the clinical setting. The fourth and final section focuses on academic expressions of bioethics, as it is theorised in various disciplines and also as it is taught, whether in classrooms or at the patient’s bedside. The book features unique contributions from a range of experts including: Alastair V Campbell; Ruth Chadwick; Angus Dawson; Raymond G. De Vries; Suzanne Ost; Renzo Pegoraro; Rouven Porz; Paul Schotsmans;Jochen Vollmann; Guy Widdershoven and Hub Zwart.
    Keywords law ; philosophy ; social sciences ; medicine ; european bioethics ; PSAD
    Subject code 170
    Language English
    Publisher Taylor & Francis
    Publishing country nl
    Document type Article ; Online
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    More links

    Kategorien

  5. Book ; Online: The Voices and Rooms of European Bioethics

    Ruud Meulen, ter / Richard Huxtable

    2015  

    Abstract: This book reflects on the many contributions made in and to European bioethics to date, in various locations, and from various disciplinary perspectives. In so doing, the book advances understanding of the academic and social status of European bioethics ...

    Abstract This book reflects on the many contributions made in and to European bioethics to date, in various locations, and from various disciplinary perspectives. In so doing, the book advances understanding of the academic and social status of European bioethics as it is being supported and practiced by various disciplines such as philosophy, law, medicine, and the social sciences, applied to a wide range of areas. The European focus offers a valuable counter-balance to an often prominent US understanding of bioethics. The volume is split into four parts. The first contains reflection on bioethics in the past, present and future, and also considers how comparison between countries and disciplines can enrich bioethical discourse. The second looks at bioethics in particular locations and contexts, including: policy, boardrooms and courtrooms; studios and virtual rooms; and society, while the third part explores the translation of theories and concepts of bioethics into the clinical setting. The fourth and final section focuses on academic expressions of bioethics, as it is theorised in various disciplines and also as it is taught, whether in classrooms or at the patient’s bedside. The book features unique contributions from a range of experts including: Alastair V Campbell; Ruth Chadwick; Angus Dawson; Raymond G. De Vries; Suzanne Ost; Renzo Pegoraro; Rouven Porz; Paul Schotsmans;Jochen Vollmann; Guy Widdershoven and Hub Zwart.
    Keywords law ; philosophy ; social sciences ; medicine ; european bioethics ; PSAD
    Subject code 170
    Language English
    Publisher Taylor & Francis
    Publishing country nl
    Document type Book ; Online
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    More links

    Kategorien

  6. Article ; Online: What empirical research has been undertaken on the ethics of clinical research in India? A systematic scoping review and narrative synthesis

    Leila Rooshenas / Jane M Blazeby / Richard Huxtable / Julia Wade / Sangeetha Paramasivan / Jonathan Ives / Jenny L Donovan / Nicola Mills / Alison Richards / Alba Realpe / Supriya Subramani

    BMJ Global Health, Vol 6, Iss

    2021  Volume 5

    Abstract: Introduction The post-2005 rise in clinical trials and clinical research conducted in India was accompanied by frequent reports of unethical practices, leading to a series of regulatory changes. We conducted a systematic scoping review to obtain an ... ...

    Abstract Introduction The post-2005 rise in clinical trials and clinical research conducted in India was accompanied by frequent reports of unethical practices, leading to a series of regulatory changes. We conducted a systematic scoping review to obtain an overview of empirical research pertaining to the ethics of clinical trials/research in India.Methods Our search strategy combined terms related to ethics/bioethics, informed consent, clinical trials/research and India, across nine databases, up to November 2019. Peer-reviewed research exploring ethical aspects of clinical trials/research in India with any stakeholder groups was included. We developed an evidence map, undertook a narrative synthesis and identified research gaps. A consultation exercise with stakeholders in India helped contextualise the review and identify additional research priorities.Results Titles/Abstracts of 9699 articles were screened, full text of 282 obtained and 80 were included. Research on the ethics of clinical trials/research covered a wide range of topics, often conducted with little to no funding. Studies predominantly examined what lay (patients/public) and professional participants (eg, healthcare staff/students/faculty) know about topics such as research ethics or understand from the information given to obtain their consent for research participation. Easily accessible groups, namely ethics committee members and healthcare students were frequently researched. Research gaps included developing a better understanding of the recruitment-informed consent process, including the doctor-patient interaction, in multiple contexts and exploring issues of equity and justice in clinical trials/research.Conclusion The review demonstrates that while a wide range of topics have been studied in India, the focus is largely on assessing knowledge levels across different population groups. This is a useful starting point, but fundamental questions remain unanswered about informed consent processes and broader issues of inequity that pervade the ...
    Keywords Medicine (General) ; R5-920 ; Infectious and parasitic diseases ; RC109-216
    Subject code 170
    Language English
    Publishing date 2021-05-01T00:00:00Z
    Publisher BMJ Publishing Group
    Document type Article ; Online
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    More links

    Kategorien

  7. Article ; Online: Genetic discrimination

    Hannah Kim / Calvin W. L. Ho / Chih-Hsing Ho / P. S. Athira / Kazuto Kato / Leonardo De Castro / Hui Kang / Richard Huxtable / Hub Zwart / Jonathan Ives / Ilhak Lee / Yann Joly / So Yoon Kim

    npj Genomic Medicine, Vol 6, Iss 1, Pp 1-

    introducing the Asian perspective to the debate

    2021  Volume 8

    Abstract: Abstract Our article aims to provide a comprehensive portrayal of how seven Asian jurisdictions have sought to address the challenge of genetic discrimination (GD) by presenting an analysis of the relevant legislation, policies, and practices. Based on ... ...

    Abstract Abstract Our article aims to provide a comprehensive portrayal of how seven Asian jurisdictions have sought to address the challenge of genetic discrimination (GD) by presenting an analysis of the relevant legislation, policies, and practices. Based on our findings, policy discussion and action on preventing or mitigating GD have been narrowly framed in terms of employment, insurance, disability, marriage, and family planning. Except for South Korea, none of the jurisdictions we examined has adopted specific legislation to prevent GD. However, for Asia to truly benefit from its recent scientific and technological progress in genomics, we highlight the need for these jurisdictions to engage more proactively with the challenges of GD through a coordinated regulatory and governance mechanism.
    Keywords Medicine ; R ; Genetics ; QH426-470
    Language English
    Publishing date 2021-07-01T00:00:00Z
    Publisher Nature Portfolio
    Document type Article ; Online
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    More links

    Kategorien

  8. Article ; Online: Core Outcomes for Colorectal Cancer Surgery

    Angus G K McNair / Robert N Whistance / Rachael O Forsythe / Rhiannon Macefield / Jonathan Rees / Anne M Pullyblank / Kerry N L Avery / Sara T Brookes / Michael G Thomas / Paul A Sylvester / Ann Russell / Alfred Oliver / Dion Morton / Robin Kennedy / David G Jayne / Richard Huxtable / Roland Hackett / Susan J Dutton / Mark G Coleman /
    Mia Card / Julia Brown / Jane M Blazeby

    PLoS Medicine, Vol 13, Iss 8, p e

    A Consensus Study.

    2016  Volume 1002071

    Abstract: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of worldwide morbidity and mortality. Surgical treatment is common, and there is a great need to improve the delivery of such care. The gold standard for evaluating surgery is within well-designed randomized ... ...

    Abstract Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of worldwide morbidity and mortality. Surgical treatment is common, and there is a great need to improve the delivery of such care. The gold standard for evaluating surgery is within well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs); however, the impact of RCTs is diminished by a lack of coordinated outcome measurement and reporting. A solution to these issues is to develop an agreed standard "core" set of outcomes to be measured in all trials to facilitate cross-study comparisons, meta-analysis, and minimize outcome reporting bias. This study defines a core outcome set for CRC surgery.The scope of this COS includes clinical effectiveness trials of surgical interventions for colorectal cancer. Excluded were nonsurgical oncological interventions. Potential outcomes of importance to patients and professionals were identified through systematic literature reviews and patient interviews. All outcomes were transcribed verbatim and categorized into domains by two independent researchers. This informed a questionnaire survey that asked stakeholders (patients and professionals) from United Kingdom CRC centers to rate the importance of each domain. Respondents were resurveyed following group feedback (Delphi methods). Outcomes rated as less important were discarded after each survey round according to predefined criteria, and remaining outcomes were considered at three consensus meetings; two involving international professionals and a separate one with patients. A modified nominal group technique was used to gain the final consensus. Data sources identified 1,216 outcomes of CRC surgery that informed a 91 domain questionnaire. First round questionnaires were returned from 63 out of 81 (78%) centers, including 90 professionals, and 97 out of 267 (35%) patients. Second round response rates were high for all stakeholders (>80%). Analysis of responses lead to 45 and 23 outcome domains being retained after the first and second surveys, respectively. Consensus meetings generated ...
    Keywords Medicine ; R
    Subject code 610
    Language English
    Publishing date 2016-08-01T00:00:00Z
    Publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
    Document type Article ; Online
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    More links

    Kategorien

To top