Developing World Bioethics最新文献

{"title":"Proportionality and Mexico's pandemic management during the COVID-19 crisis.","authors":"Felicitas Holzer,&nbsp;Ivette M Ortiz Alcántara,&nbsp;Tobias Eichinger,&nbsp;Julian W März","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12429","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12429","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mexico's pandemic management and the absence of measures have been harshly criticized as being disproportionate. This paper examines whether the proportionality principle was properly applied to Mexico's COVID-19 response and outlines three reasons against such an endeavor, namely (i) the content of \"proportionate measures\" remained insufficiently well defined, (ii) there were yet fundamental rights conflicts to resolve, and (iii) the situation was moreover characterized by epistemic uncertainty.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41240588","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Global health impact, priority and time","authors":"Anders Herlitz","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12428","DOIUrl":"10.1111/dewb.12428","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper addresses normative issues that arise in relation to indicators and measures of health impact. With inspiration from Nicole Hassoun's recent proposal, the paper argues and illustrates that those interested in measuring global health impact face questions about how to prioritize among those with ill-health, how to weigh benefits to those who cannot lead minimally good lives against benefits to the better off, and how to think about whether someone is badly off.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dewb.12428","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41219235","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Examining the adequacy of preoperative informed consent in a developing country: Challenges in the era of surgical specialisation.","authors":"Osita Ede,&nbsp;Oke R Obadaseraye,&nbsp;Ifeanyi Anichi,&nbsp;Chisom Mbaeze,&nbsp;Chukwuka O Udemezue,&nbsp;Chinonso Basil-Nwachuku,&nbsp;Kenechi A Madu,&nbsp;Emmanuel C Iyidobi,&nbsp;Udo E Anyaehie,&nbsp;Cajetan U Nwadinigwe,&nbsp;Chidinma Ngwangwa,&nbsp;Uto Essien Adetula","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12427","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12427","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Preoperative informed consent is a legal and ethical requirement that ensures patients understand a procedure, its associated risks and benefits, alternative treatment options, and potential complications to make an informed decision about their care. This cross-sectional study evaluated the informed consent process for major orthopaedic surgeries at a tertiary hospital in Nigeria. A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from 120 adult participants. Results showed that many patients do not read the consent form before signing it, and surgeons do not adequately explain the alternatives to surgery, potential risks, and available anaesthetic options. Higher-educated patients are more likely to read the consent form. Surgeons performed well in explaining the nature of the condition and prognosis, the procedure's potential benefits, and answering patients' questions. The study emphasises the need to improve the informed consent process to ensure patients understand and can make rational decisions about their healthcare.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41150864","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Are Turkish doctors in deep water? The role of professional ethics and factors affecting the medical brain drain: A qualitative study from Turkey.","authors":"F Gülsüm Önal,&nbsp;Fatih Erkan Akay","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12426","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12426","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>With the increased rate of the Turkish medical brain drain (MDB) in recent years, there is a need for more comprehensive studies to elucidate its vague migratory factors. The aim of this paper is to try to narrow that gap by analyzing present impacts of the MDB in Turkey and to evaluate if these aspects were driven by professional ethical values, and if so, what ethical principles they were based on. In-depth interviews were conducted with 19 doctors from various backgrounds, followed by a thematic analysis. The MDB in Turkey demonstrated a multifactorial structure, with prominent push factors that are intertwined at macro-meso-micro levels. The effort to maintain the principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, and protecting professional autonomy were the most important in the context of professional ethics. Only deep-rooted regulations might ensure the prevention of the MDB in Turkey and the prospect of doctors returning in the future. Conclusively, the recent criticisms the MDB has been garnering may inspire improvements in deteriorating human and health rights in Turkey.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41168681","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Editors' statement on the responsible use of generative artificial intelligence technologies in scholarly journal publishing","authors":"Gregory E. Kaebnick,&nbsp;David Christopher Magnus,&nbsp;Audiey Kao,&nbsp;Mohammad Hosseini,&nbsp;David Resnik,&nbsp;Veljko Dubljević,&nbsp;Christy Rentmeester,&nbsp;Bert Gordijn","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12424","DOIUrl":"10.1111/dewb.12424","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The new generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools, and especially the large language models (LLMs) of which ChatGPT is the most prominent example, have the potential to transform many aspects of scholarly publishing. How the transformations will play out remains to be seen, both because the different parties involved in the production and publication of scholarly work are still learning about these tools and because the tools themselves are still in development, but the tools have a vast range of potential uses. Authors are likely to use generative AI to conduct research, frame their thoughts, produce data, search for ways of articulating their thoughts, develop drafts, generate text, revise their writing, and create visuals. Peer reviewers might use AI to help them produce their reviews. Editors might use AI in the initial editorial screening of manuscripts, to locate reviewers, or for copyediting.</p><p>We are editors of bioethics and humanities journals who have been contemplating the implications of this ongoing transformation. We believe that generative AI may pose a threat to the goals that animate our work but could also be valuable for achieving those goals. We do not pretend to have resolved the many social questions that we think generative AI raises for scholarly publishing, but in the interest of fostering a wider conversation about these questions, we have developed a preliminary set of recommendations about generative AI in scholarly publishing. We hope that the recommendations and rationales set out here will help the scholarly community navigate toward a deeper understanding of the strengths, limits, and challenges of AI for responsible scholarly work.</p><p>The stance set out here is consistent with those taken by the Committee on Publishing Ethics and many journal publishers, including those that publish or provide publishing services to the journals we edit. Previous position statements have addressed concerns about the use of AI for peer review and the importance of reviewers revealing to authors if they used AI in their review.5 However, to our knowledge, none have addressed the importance of using human reviewers to review manuscripts and editors retaining final decisions over what reviewers to select. Our stance differs from the position of <i>Science</i> magazine, which holds not only that a generative AI tool cannot be an author but also that “text generated by ChatGPT (or any other AI tools) cannot be used in the work, nor can figures, images, or graphics be the products of such tools.”6 Such a proscription is too broad and may be impossible to enforce, in our view. Yet we recognize that the ethical issues raised by generative AI are complex, and we have struggled to decide how editors should promote responsible use of these technologies. Over time, we hope, the community of scholars will develop professional norms about the appropriate ways of using these new tools. Reviewers and readers, not just editors, will h","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dewb.12424","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41156134","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A Sino-African perspective and the morality of procreation.","authors":"Luís Cordeiro-Rodrigues,&nbsp;Qingjuan Sun,&nbsp;Aribiah David Attoe,&nbsp;Cornelius Ewuoso","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12425","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12425","url":null,"abstract":"Current studies of anti/-natalism have been carried out mainly in the context of western philosophy. In this article, we offer a pro-natalist view based on Confucian and Afro-communitarian philosophy (Sino-African ethics). Grounded in this Sino-African perspective, we uphold that there is, at least, one reason to believe that not only is it morally permissible to procreate, but also that on some occasions, procreating is what morality prescribes. Specifically, we contend that, from a Sino-African perspective, procreating sometimes is the best way to fulfil duties of reciprocity and care towards our parents.","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41180414","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Frozen and forgotten: What are South African fertility clinics to do with surplus cryopreserved embryos once their patients lose interest?","authors":"Donrich W Thaldar,&nbsp;Aliki Edgcumbe","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12422","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12422","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As is the case around the globe, South African fertility clinics face an ever-expanding problem: what to do with the growing number of surplus cryopreserved embryos. Fertility clinics remain hesitant to destroy these abandoned embryos, partly because of concerns about the legal ramifications. This article clarifies the legal position in South Africa and offers practical recommendations to assist fertility clinics in managing abandoned embryos. In sum, fertility clinics cannot deem embryos as abandoned and discard them if fertility patients fail to respond to a notice that the embryo storage agreement is about to expire. However, if there is non-payment for embryo storage by fertility patients and the fertility clinic has informed the fertility patients of other options available to them with respect to their embryos, and there is still no response, the fertility clinic is legally entitled - and legally obliged - to discard the embryos.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10435117","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The ASGLOS Study: A global survey on how predatory journals affect scientific practice","authors":"Alessandro Martinino,&nbsp;Oshin Puri,&nbsp;Juan Pablo Scarano Pereira,&nbsp;Eloise Owen,&nbsp;Surobhi Chatterjee,&nbsp;Mohamed Abouelazayem,&nbsp;Wah Yang,&nbsp;Francesk Mulita,&nbsp;Yitka Graham,&nbsp;Chetan Parmar,&nbsp;Dharmanand Ramnarain,&nbsp;Arda Isik,&nbsp;Shruti Yadav,&nbsp;Bhargavi R. Budihal,&nbsp;Shankarsai Kashyap,&nbsp;Mohammad Aloulou,&nbsp;Mrinmoy Kundu,&nbsp;Arturan Ibrahimli,&nbsp;Eshwar Rajesh,&nbsp;Reewen George D. Silva,&nbsp;Gaurang Bhatt,&nbsp;Kashish Malhotra,&nbsp;Riccardo Magnani,&nbsp;Frank W. J. M. Smeenk,&nbsp;Sjaak Pouwels","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12421","DOIUrl":"10.1111/dewb.12421","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Predatory journals and conferences are an emerging problem in scientific literature as they have financial motives, without guaranteeing scientific quality and exposure. The main objective of the ASGLOS project is to investigate the predatory e-email characteristics, management, and possible consequences and to analyse the extent of the current problem at each academic level. To collect the personal experiences of physicians’ mailboxes on predatory publishing, a Google Form® survey was designed and disseminated from September 2021 to April 2022. A total of 978 responses were analysed from 58 countries around the world. A total of 64.8% of participants indicated the need for 3 or fewer emails to acquire a criticality view in distinguishing a real invitation from a spam, while 11.5% still have doubt regardless of how many emails they get. The AGLOS Study clearly highlights the problem of academic e-mail spam by predatory journals and conferences. Our findings signify the importance of providing academic career-oriented advice and organising training sessions to increase awareness of predatory publishing for those conducting scientific research.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10125966","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Oocyte cryopreservation for non-medical reasons: Ethical and regulatory concerns in China","authors":"Yu Lanyi,&nbsp;Zhai Xiaomei PhD","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12418","DOIUrl":"10.1111/dewb.12418","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Assisted reproductive technology is a complex medical intervention with many potential social sensitivities. Within this domain, oocyte cryopreservation has emerged as an important research area for preserving female fertility. Against the backdrop of the hotly debated first legal case in China of a single woman wishing to freeze her eggs, and the implementation of the ‘three-child policy’ in China, there is an urgent need to evaluate policies and address ethical considerations surrounding oocyte cryopreservation for non-medical reasons. This review examines current policies, explores China's practices and research, and examines the latest ethical challenges surrounding non-medical oocyte cryopreservation. It develops strategies and recommendations that will be relevant in China and other developing countries seeking to navigate this complex landscape.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9957938","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"When medical professionalism and culture or the law collide: Gay patients in homophobic societies","authors":"Udo Schuklenk","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12420","DOIUrl":"10.1111/dewb.12420","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Medical professionalism faces serious challenges in homophobic societies. A case in point: Uganda. The country has gained global notoriety for having implemented one of the toughest anti-LGBTQ laws in the world. It includes the death penalty for something called ‘aggravated homosexuality’, as well as a 20-year prison sentence for ‘promoting’ homosexuality.1</p><p>When issuing a different, less draconian anti-gay legislation some years back, the country's health minister assured Ugandans, as well as the international community, that all people, regardless of sexual orientation, would receive ‘full treatment’ and added that ‘health workers will live up to their ethics of keeping confidentiality of their patients’.2 Gay patients experienced a quite different reality. In 2017 the activist group <i>Sexual Minorities Uganda</i> issued a report under the title <i>‘Even if they spit at you, don't be surprised</i>’.3 I recommend the document to your attention. It's replete with first-person accounts of unprofessional conduct by health care professionals. It ranges from the use of derogatory language to refusal of service provision to actual physical attacks. There is also evidence of medical school training containing scientific misinformation on homosexuality.</p><p>While unusual by today's global standards, Uganda isn't the only country with anti-gay legislation on its books. Less draconian legislation can be found in homophobic societies like Jamaica, for instance. There is a high number of former British colonies with such laws, but it's unclear whether that's mere correlation or whether there is a causation-type relationship. While the legislation in place oftentimes is a relic of colonial era laws, there also appears to be widespread societal support for such measures in these predominantly Christian societies. While some Caribbean nations have recently decriminalized consensual same-sex relations, six Caribbean countries, among them larger countries like Jamaica, still criminalise consensual same-sex sexual relations. They are not alone, some 66 countries reportedly criminalise consensual same-sex relations.4 The World Medical Association saw it fit, against this background, to issue a strong statement condemning the participation of medical professionals in anal examinations ostensibly designed to assist in determinations of same-sex sexual activities.5 Apparently such examinations actually happen in certain societies, even though they are based on humbug science.6</p><p>This raises a number of important issues regarding the health care that patients who identify as gay or queer, or who participate in same-sex sexual relations, can reasonably expect in such societies. The uncontroversial objective of health care provision is to increase or maximise the number of life-years a person can live with a good quality of life that makes their life worth living, in their own considered judgment. Health care professionals value judgments about the lifest","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dewb.12420","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10555773","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}