司法医学鉴定中的虚拟专家评价:巴西远程医疗监管后的现状

Gabriel Sato Ikuhara Cavalcanti Picos, Renata Luciana Moraes, Veronica Scriptore Freire e Almeida, Thalysse Bezzera Correia
{"title":"司法医学鉴定中的虚拟专家评价:巴西远程医疗监管后的现状","authors":"Gabriel Sato Ikuhara Cavalcanti Picos, Renata Luciana Moraes, Veronica Scriptore Freire e Almeida, Thalysse Bezzera Correia","doi":"10.47005/230203","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: In the context of disagreement between different fields of medicine, law, justice, legislation, doctrines and complementary sciences regarding telemedicine, the need to carry out this study became evident. Objective: to discuss the relationship between the current legislation in force in October 2022, after the regulation of telemedicine in Brazil, with the possibility of using technologies, in judicial medical expertise or telemedicine in that country. Methodology: This theoretical and qualitative work has a descriptive and explanatory nature, through bibliographic research, searching in databases, as well as analyzing doctrines, legislation and related jurisprudence, and through an ontological hermeneutic approach, relating the variables, advantages and risks , with the historical, theoretical, doctrinal and scientific technical basis. Discussion: Resolution number 317, of the National Council of Justice (CNJ) and national jurisprudence on the use of medical teleexpertise, contrast with the position of the national medical community, through the Federal Council of Medicine (CFM), whose understanding remains evident through opinions and resolutions, regarding the inoperability of such a practice currently. Conclusion: The contemporary national situation of teleexpertise is rudimentary, abstaining from scientific substrate, tools or other methodologies that allow its ethical, fair, legal implementation, free from external influences, under current conditions. Keywords: Expert Testimony, Telemedicine, Health Law, Health’s Judicialization, Remote Consultatio, Telediagnostics.","PeriodicalId":366101,"journal":{"name":"Perspectivas em medicina legal e pericias medicas","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"VIRTUAL EXPERT EVALUATION IN JUDICIAL MEDICAL EXPERTISE: CURRENT SITUATION, AFTER TELEMEDICINE´S REGULATION IN BRAZIL\",\"authors\":\"Gabriel Sato Ikuhara Cavalcanti Picos, Renata Luciana Moraes, Veronica Scriptore Freire e Almeida, Thalysse Bezzera Correia\",\"doi\":\"10.47005/230203\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: In the context of disagreement between different fields of medicine, law, justice, legislation, doctrines and complementary sciences regarding telemedicine, the need to carry out this study became evident. Objective: to discuss the relationship between the current legislation in force in October 2022, after the regulation of telemedicine in Brazil, with the possibility of using technologies, in judicial medical expertise or telemedicine in that country. Methodology: This theoretical and qualitative work has a descriptive and explanatory nature, through bibliographic research, searching in databases, as well as analyzing doctrines, legislation and related jurisprudence, and through an ontological hermeneutic approach, relating the variables, advantages and risks , with the historical, theoretical, doctrinal and scientific technical basis. Discussion: Resolution number 317, of the National Council of Justice (CNJ) and national jurisprudence on the use of medical teleexpertise, contrast with the position of the national medical community, through the Federal Council of Medicine (CFM), whose understanding remains evident through opinions and resolutions, regarding the inoperability of such a practice currently. Conclusion: The contemporary national situation of teleexpertise is rudimentary, abstaining from scientific substrate, tools or other methodologies that allow its ethical, fair, legal implementation, free from external influences, under current conditions. Keywords: Expert Testimony, Telemedicine, Health Law, Health’s Judicialization, Remote Consultatio, Telediagnostics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":366101,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perspectivas em medicina legal e pericias medicas\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perspectivas em medicina legal e pericias medicas\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47005/230203\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectivas em medicina legal e pericias medicas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47005/230203","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在医学、法律、司法、立法、理论和互补科学等不同领域对远程医疗存在分歧的背景下,开展这项研究的必要性变得显而易见。目标:讨论2022年10月生效的现行立法(在巴西对远程医疗进行监管之后)与在该国司法医学专门知识或远程医疗中使用技术的可能性之间的关系。方法论:这一理论和定性工作具有描述性和解释性,通过书目研究、数据库检索、理论、立法和相关法学分析,并通过本体论解释学方法,将变量、优势和风险与历史、理论、理论和科学技术基础联系起来。讨论:国家司法委员会第317号决议和关于使用医疗远程专业知识的国家判例,与国家医学界通过联邦医学委员会的立场形成对比,联邦医学委员会通过意见和决议仍然清楚地认识到目前这种做法的不可操作性。结论:当代远程医疗的国情尚处于初级阶段,缺乏科学基础、工具或其他方法,使其在当前条件下能够在不受外部影响的情况下实现伦理、公平、合法的实施。关键词:专家证言、远程医疗、卫生法、卫生司法、远程会诊、远程诊断
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
VIRTUAL EXPERT EVALUATION IN JUDICIAL MEDICAL EXPERTISE: CURRENT SITUATION, AFTER TELEMEDICINE´S REGULATION IN BRAZIL
Introduction: In the context of disagreement between different fields of medicine, law, justice, legislation, doctrines and complementary sciences regarding telemedicine, the need to carry out this study became evident. Objective: to discuss the relationship between the current legislation in force in October 2022, after the regulation of telemedicine in Brazil, with the possibility of using technologies, in judicial medical expertise or telemedicine in that country. Methodology: This theoretical and qualitative work has a descriptive and explanatory nature, through bibliographic research, searching in databases, as well as analyzing doctrines, legislation and related jurisprudence, and through an ontological hermeneutic approach, relating the variables, advantages and risks , with the historical, theoretical, doctrinal and scientific technical basis. Discussion: Resolution number 317, of the National Council of Justice (CNJ) and national jurisprudence on the use of medical teleexpertise, contrast with the position of the national medical community, through the Federal Council of Medicine (CFM), whose understanding remains evident through opinions and resolutions, regarding the inoperability of such a practice currently. Conclusion: The contemporary national situation of teleexpertise is rudimentary, abstaining from scientific substrate, tools or other methodologies that allow its ethical, fair, legal implementation, free from external influences, under current conditions. Keywords: Expert Testimony, Telemedicine, Health Law, Health’s Judicialization, Remote Consultatio, Telediagnostics.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信