Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics最新文献

The Ethical Justifiability of Patient Restraint in Hospitals: Moving to a Public Health Ethics Approach. 医院病人约束的伦理正当性：转向公共卫生伦理途径。

IF 1.7 4区哲学

Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics Pub Date : 2026-05-08 DOI: 10.1017/jme.2026.10255

Courtney Coyne, Rosalind McDougall

{"title":"The Ethical Justifiability of Patient Restraint in Hospitals: Moving to a Public Health Ethics Approach.","authors":"Courtney Coyne, Rosalind McDougall","doi":"10.1017/jme.2026.10255","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jme.2026.10255","url":null,"abstract":"The use of restraint in hospital settings is divisive, and internationally there are calls for its elimination. However, this is at odds with the experience of many hospital staff, who consider restraint, at times, a \"necessary evil\". In this paper, we explore the definition of restraint and potential ethical justifications for its use. We argue that the current ethical literature employs two definitions of restraint - outcome-oriented and intent-oriented - neither of which successfully captures all ethically relevant features of the practice. We propose a new conceptualization of restraint which centers on the number of individuals impacted by an act of patient restraint - a continuum between therapeutic restraint and public-safety restraint. Understood in this way, neither the principlist nor human rights frameworks that dominate the current literature are appropriate for assessing the ethical legitimacy of restraint. We suggest that, given the similarities between restraint and public health interventions, the use of public health ethics principles to consider the ethical justifiability of restraint in hospitals is a potentially productive way forward in this controversial area.","PeriodicalId":50165,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2026-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147845482","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Insurrection Powers and the Public's Health. 起义军与公众健康

IF 1.7 4区哲学

Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics Pub Date : 2026-05-05 DOI: 10.1017/jme.2026.10253

James G Hodge, Taylor Brown, Kimberly Hartle

引用次数: 0

Minding the Gap: The Absence of Pennsylvania's Involuntary Commitment Data. 注意差距：宾夕法尼亚州非自愿承诺数据的缺失。

IF 1.7 4区哲学

Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics Pub Date : 2026-05-05 DOI: 10.1017/jme.2026.10264

Ari Gluckman, Michele Mekel, Laura Cabrera

引用次数: 0

AI's Promise of Healthy Longevity: Exploring the Implications of Extended Lifespans Under International Law. 人工智能对健康长寿的承诺：探索国际法下延长寿命的含义。

IF 1.7 4区哲学

Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics Pub Date : 2026-04-24 DOI: 10.1017/jme.2026.10262

Jon Truby, Indira Dewi Kantiana

引用次数: 0

The Sufficiency of Disclosure in Medical AI Patents: Evidence from 865 Granted Patents Across the US, China, and the EU. 医疗人工智能专利披露的充分性：来自美国、中国和欧盟865项授权专利的证据

IF 1.7 4区哲学

Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics Pub Date : 2026-04-20 DOI: 10.1017/jme.2026.10256

Ruyi Xiao, Jin Zhang

{"title":"The Sufficiency of Disclosure in Medical AI Patents: Evidence from 865 Granted Patents Across the US, China, and the EU.","authors":"Ruyi Xiao, Jin Zhang","doi":"10.1017/jme.2026.10256","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jme.2026.10256","url":null,"abstract":"The rise of health care AI raises concerns over whether patent disclosure supports reproducibility and legal validity. This study analyzes 865 granted medical AI patents (2015-2025) from the US, China, and the EU using a five-dimensional framework (algorithm transparency, training data accessibility, model reproducibility, result verifiability, and mathematical support) implemented through NLP-assisted expert scoring. Results suggest limited technical transparency; approximately 40% of patents score zero in at least two dimensions. Performance varies significantly: algorithm transparency is relatively strong (>60% score 2), while training data accessibility is less prevalent (4.6% score 2) and mathematical support is frequently omitted (39.4% score 0). Statistical testing indicates US patents significantly outperform Chinese patents (p < 0.001), while EU results remain exploratory (N = 31, mean 6.2). These patterns appear associated with institutional factors, strategic applicant behaviour, and technical complexity. Such limitations may pose risks to enforceability and market development, highlighting the need for targeted disclosure improvements. This study contributes a replicable framework for translating legal standards into measurable indicators, providing cross-jurisdictional evidence to guide examination, litigation, and policy refinement in medical AI governance.","PeriodicalId":50165,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2026-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147724173","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Beyond the Benefit of Doubt: Biases and Credibility in the Adjudication of Chronic Pain. 超越怀疑的好处：慢性疼痛裁决中的偏见和可信度。

IF 1.7 4区哲学

Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics Pub Date : 2026-04-17 DOI: 10.1017/jme.2026.10261

Rodrigo Deamo Assis, Steven P Cohen, Hance Clarke, Nimish Mittal, Mary-Ann Fitzcharles

{"title":"Beyond the Benefit of Doubt: Biases and Credibility in the Adjudication of Chronic Pain.","authors":"Rodrigo Deamo Assis, Steven P Cohen, Hance Clarke, Nimish Mittal, Mary-Ann Fitzcharles","doi":"10.1017/jme.2026.10261","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jme.2026.10261","url":null,"abstract":"Patients living with nociplastic pain are at particular risk of being unfairly judged because their symptoms are subjective and occur without measurable abnormalities. Nociplastic pain, now recognized as a third category of pain alongside nociceptive and neuropathic pain, arises in the absence of tissue damage sufficient to explain the clinical presentation. This \"unseen\" pain affects at least ten percent of the population, commonly involves the musculoskeletal or visceral systems, and leads to substantial suffering and functional impairment. Validation of these chronic symptoms is often contentious because no objective biomarker or physical sign can reliably confirm their presence or severity. The concept of illness without measurable parameters challenges clinicians and conflicts with legal systems that rely heavily on objective evidence in adjudicating health-related questions. Most clinicians have limited training in medicolegal principles, standards of impartiality, or the ethical distinctions between patient advocacy and objective reporting. These challenges are amplified in cases involving chronic nociplastic pain, where the lack of observable findings complicates clinical interpretation and may conflict with traditional expectations for legal evidence. Bias, whether conscious or unconscious, may occur at multiple stages of the medicolegal process. Inaccurate, incomplete, or biased information from patients, treating clinicians, independent medical experts, insurers, or legal representatives can influence fairness, credibility, and decisional outcomes. This review summarizes key considerations in the adjudication of chronic nociplastic pain and examines how various sources of bias may shape medicolegal decision-making. Improving awareness of these risks and implementing strategies to reduce bias may promote a more reliable and equitable interface between clinical assessment and legal adjudication.","PeriodicalId":50165,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2026-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147700644","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Redefining Pain and Addiction: How Opioid Manufacturers Changed Medical Language to Foster Opioid Use. 重新定义疼痛和成瘾：阿片类药物制造商如何改变医学语言以促进阿片类药物的使用。

IF 1.7 4区哲学

Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics Pub Date : 2026-04-16 DOI: 10.1017/jme.2026.10258

Aidan Kaspari, Judy Butler, Adriane Fugh-Berman

引用次数: 0

Ethical and Legal Dilemmas in Prolonged Physiologic Support after Brain Death in Previable Pregnancy. 妊娠前脑死亡后延长生理支持的伦理和法律困境。

IF 1.7 4区哲学

Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics Pub Date : 2026-04-15 DOI: 10.1017/jme.2026.10260

April R Dworetz, Allison M Whelan, Ashley Waddell Tingstad, Kara B Markham, DonnaMaria E Cortezzo

引用次数: 0

Beyond Individual Privacy: A Layered Diagnostic Model for Analyzing Genetic Data Governance. 超越个人隐私：分析基因数据治理的分层诊断模型。

IF 1.7 4区哲学

Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics Pub Date : 2026-04-10 DOI: 10.1017/jme.2026.10259

Ruoxin Su

引用次数: 0

David Wasserman and Supported Decision-Making in Research. 大卫·沃瑟曼和研究中的支持性决策。

IF 1.7 4区哲学

Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics Pub Date : 2026-04-06 DOI: 10.1017/jme.2026.10257

Adam Cureton

{"title":"David Wasserman and Supported Decision-Making in Research.","authors":"Adam Cureton","doi":"10.1017/jme.2026.10257","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jme.2026.10257","url":null,"abstract":"This memorial essay introduces the Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics special issue on supported decision-making in research by honoring David T. Wasserman (1953-2025), a major organizer of the NIH workshop from which the issue emerged and a coauthor of two papers in the volume. It situates supported decision-making in research as an emerging approach that aims to make participation by people with cognitive disabilities possible without displacing their agency through default reliance on legally authorized representatives. The essay highlights Wasserman's distinctive contribution to this developing area. He sought a position that is respectful while remaining clear eyed about exploitation risks and about well-intentioned practices that can undermine a participant's interests, especially in hard cases where meaningful authorization is fragile. Drawing on the two coauthored papers in the issue and on colleagues' recollections, the essay emphasizes Wasserman's commitment to conceptual clarity, workable institutional design, and mentorship through collaboration. It closes by reflecting on his intellectual virtues, humor, and lasting influence on disability bioethics and research ethics.","PeriodicalId":50165,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"1-3"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2026-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147624177","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0