加拿大全民肺癌筛查的伦理问题:关键信息提供者定性描述研究》。

IF 1.4 3区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Public Health Ethics Pub Date : 2024-08-29 eCollection Date: 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1093/phe/phae008
Manisha Pahwa, Julia Abelson, Paul A Demers, Lisa Schwartz, Katrina Shen, Meredith Vanstone
{"title":"加拿大全民肺癌筛查的伦理问题:关键信息提供者定性描述研究》。","authors":"Manisha Pahwa, Julia Abelson, Paul A Demers, Lisa Schwartz, Katrina Shen, Meredith Vanstone","doi":"10.1093/phe/phae008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Normative issues associated with the design and implementation of population-based lung cancer screening policies are underexamined. This study was an exposition of the ethical justification for screening and potential ethical issues and their solutions in Canadian jurisdictions. A qualitative description study was conducted. Key informants, defined as policymakers, scientists and clinicians who develop and implement lung cancer screening policies in Canada, were purposively sampled and interviewed using a semi-structured guide informed by population-based disease screening principles and ethical issues in cancer screening. Interview data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Fifteen key informants from seven provinces were interviewed. Virtually all justified screening by beneficence, describing that population benefits outweigh individual harms if high-risk people are screened in organized programs according to disease screening principles. Equity of screening access, stigma and lung cancer primary prevention were other ethical issues identified. Key informants prioritized beneficence over concerns for group-level justice issues when making decisions about whether to implement screening policies. This prioritization, though slight, may impede the implementation of screening policies in a way that effectively addresses justice issues, a goal likely to require justice theory and critical interpretation of disease screening principles.</p>","PeriodicalId":49136,"journal":{"name":"Public Health Ethics","volume":"17 3","pages":"139-153"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11637757/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ethical Dimensions of Population-Based Lung Cancer Screening in Canada: Key Informant Qualitative Description Study.\",\"authors\":\"Manisha Pahwa, Julia Abelson, Paul A Demers, Lisa Schwartz, Katrina Shen, Meredith Vanstone\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/phe/phae008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Normative issues associated with the design and implementation of population-based lung cancer screening policies are underexamined. This study was an exposition of the ethical justification for screening and potential ethical issues and their solutions in Canadian jurisdictions. A qualitative description study was conducted. Key informants, defined as policymakers, scientists and clinicians who develop and implement lung cancer screening policies in Canada, were purposively sampled and interviewed using a semi-structured guide informed by population-based disease screening principles and ethical issues in cancer screening. Interview data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Fifteen key informants from seven provinces were interviewed. Virtually all justified screening by beneficence, describing that population benefits outweigh individual harms if high-risk people are screened in organized programs according to disease screening principles. Equity of screening access, stigma and lung cancer primary prevention were other ethical issues identified. Key informants prioritized beneficence over concerns for group-level justice issues when making decisions about whether to implement screening policies. This prioritization, though slight, may impede the implementation of screening policies in a way that effectively addresses justice issues, a goal likely to require justice theory and critical interpretation of disease screening principles.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49136,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Health Ethics\",\"volume\":\"17 3\",\"pages\":\"139-153\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11637757/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Health Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/phe/phae008\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/phe/phae008","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

与以人群为基础的肺癌筛查政策的设计和实施相关的规范性问题尚未得到充分审查。本研究是对加拿大司法管辖区筛选和潜在伦理问题及其解决方案的伦理理由的阐述。进行了定性描述研究。主要信息提供者(定义为在加拿大制定和实施肺癌筛查政策的决策者、科学家和临床医生)使用基于人群的疾病筛查原则和癌症筛查中的伦理问题的半结构化指南进行了有目的的抽样和访谈。访谈资料采用定性内容分析法进行分析。采访了来自7个省的15名关键线人。事实上,所有的筛查都是通过慈善来证明的,描述了如果高风险人群根据疾病筛查原则在有组织的项目中进行筛查,那么人群的益处大于个人的危害。筛查机会公平、污名化和肺癌一级预防是确定的其他伦理问题。在决定是否实施筛查政策时,关键举报人优先考虑的是慈善,而不是群体层面的正义问题。这种优先次序虽然轻微,但可能会阻碍筛查政策的实施,从而有效地解决司法问题,这一目标可能需要司法理论和对疾病筛查原则的批判性解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ethical Dimensions of Population-Based Lung Cancer Screening in Canada: Key Informant Qualitative Description Study.

Normative issues associated with the design and implementation of population-based lung cancer screening policies are underexamined. This study was an exposition of the ethical justification for screening and potential ethical issues and their solutions in Canadian jurisdictions. A qualitative description study was conducted. Key informants, defined as policymakers, scientists and clinicians who develop and implement lung cancer screening policies in Canada, were purposively sampled and interviewed using a semi-structured guide informed by population-based disease screening principles and ethical issues in cancer screening. Interview data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Fifteen key informants from seven provinces were interviewed. Virtually all justified screening by beneficence, describing that population benefits outweigh individual harms if high-risk people are screened in organized programs according to disease screening principles. Equity of screening access, stigma and lung cancer primary prevention were other ethical issues identified. Key informants prioritized beneficence over concerns for group-level justice issues when making decisions about whether to implement screening policies. This prioritization, though slight, may impede the implementation of screening policies in a way that effectively addresses justice issues, a goal likely to require justice theory and critical interpretation of disease screening principles.

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
Public Health Ethics
Public Health Ethics PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-MEDICAL ETHICS
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
9.50%
发文量
28
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Public Health Ethics invites submission of papers on any topic that is relevant for ethical reflection about public health practice and theory. Our aim is to publish readable papers of high scientific quality which will stimulate debate and discussion about ethical issues relating to all aspects of public health. Our main criteria for grading manuscripts include originality and potential impact, quality of philosophical analysis, and relevance to debates in public health ethics and practice. Manuscripts are accepted for publication on the understanding that they have been submitted solely to Public Health Ethics and that they have not been previously published either in whole or in part. Authors may not submit papers that are under consideration for publication elsewhere, and, if an author decides to offer a submitted paper to another journal, the paper must be withdrawn from Public Health Ethics before the new submission is made. The editorial office will make every effort to deal with submissions to the journal as quickly as possible. All papers will be acknowledged on receipt by email and will receive preliminary editorial review within 2 weeks. Papers of high interest will be sent out for external review. Authors will normally be notified of acceptance, rejection, or need for revision within 8 weeks of submission. Contributors will be provided with electronic access to their proof via email; corrections should be returned within 48 hours.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信