1. |
|
|
2. |
|
|
3. |
- Björk, J, et al.
(author)
-
Empirical and philosophical analysis of physicians' judgments of medical indications
- 2016
-
In: Clinical ethics. - : SAGE Publications. - 1477-7509 .- 1758-101X. ; 11:4, s. 190-199
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The aim of this study was to investigate whether physicians who felt strongly for or against a treatment, in this case a moderately life prolonging non-curative cancer treatment, differed in their estimation of medical indication for this treatment as compared to physicians who had no such sentiment. A further aim was to investigate how the notion of medical indication was conceptualised. Methods A random sample of GPs, oncologists and pulmonologists (n = 646) comprised the study group. Respondents were randomised to receive either version of a case presentation; in one version, the patient had smoked and in the other version she had never smoked. The physicians were labelled value-neutral (65%) and value-influenced (35%) on the basis of their attitude towards the treatment. Results In the ‘value-influenced’ group, there was a significant difference in the estimation of medical indication for treatment depending upon whether the patient had smoked (50% (95% CI: 41–59) or never smoked (67% (95% CI: 58–76) (Chi-2 = 5.8, df = 1; p = 0.016)). There was no such difference in the ‘value-neutral’ group. Conclusion This study shows that compared to value-neutral physicians, value-influenced physicians are more likely to base decisions of medical indication on medically irrelevant factors (in this case: the patient’s smoking status). Moreover, medical indication is used in an ambiguous manner. Hence, we recommend that the usage of ‘medical indication’ be disciplined.
|
|
4. |
|
|
5. |
|
|
6. |
- Helgesson, G, et al.
(author)
-
Misuse of Coauthorship in Medical Theses in Sweden
- 2018
-
In: Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE. - : SAGE Publications. - 1556-2654 .- 1556-2646. ; 13:4, s. 402-411
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The aim of this study was to explore experiences of authorship issues among persons who have recently received their doctoral degree in medicine in Sweden. A survey was mailed to all who received their PhD at a medical faculty at a Swedish university the first half of 2016. Questions concerned experiences of violations of the first three authorship criteria in the Vancouver rules and of misuse of authorship order in the articles of their thesis, and the respondents’ attitudes to these matters. The questionnaire was returned by 285 respondents (68%). According to the majority (53%), the Vancouver rules were not fully respected in the articles of their thesis. A vast majority (97%) found it important that authorship issues are handled correctly, but only 19% responded that their department has a clear and consistently applied policy. We conclude that authorship guidelines are frequently disrespected at medical faculties in Sweden. The universities seem to provide limited support on authorship issues.
|
|
7. |
|
|
8. |
|
|
9. |
|
|
10. |
|
|