优先考虑患者的一致意见:医疗资源分配中偏好的相关性

IF 1.8 3区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
A. Furnham, Charlotte L. Robinson, Simmy Grover
{"title":"优先考虑患者的一致意见:医疗资源分配中偏好的相关性","authors":"A. Furnham, Charlotte L. Robinson, Simmy Grover","doi":"10.1080/10508422.2022.2113081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Five hundred adults indicated their preferences about the fairness and ethics of allocating scarce medical interventions. They also completed an IQ test, a measure of self-esteem and the extent to which they believed in a Just World, as well as General Conspiracy Theories. Results confirmed previous studies which showed a strong preference for the Utilitarian “saves most lives,” followed by the Prioritization “sickest first” and “youngest first,” preferences. Correlations and regressions indicated relatively few significant individual difference correlates of allocation preferences, with IQ being the major exception. Implications and limitations are discussed.","PeriodicalId":47265,"journal":{"name":"Ethics & Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Consensual ideas for prioritizing patients: correlates of preferences in the allocation of medical resources\",\"authors\":\"A. Furnham, Charlotte L. Robinson, Simmy Grover\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10508422.2022.2113081\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Five hundred adults indicated their preferences about the fairness and ethics of allocating scarce medical interventions. They also completed an IQ test, a measure of self-esteem and the extent to which they believed in a Just World, as well as General Conspiracy Theories. Results confirmed previous studies which showed a strong preference for the Utilitarian “saves most lives,” followed by the Prioritization “sickest first” and “youngest first,” preferences. Correlations and regressions indicated relatively few significant individual difference correlates of allocation preferences, with IQ being the major exception. Implications and limitations are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47265,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethics & Behavior\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethics & Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2022.2113081\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics & Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2022.2113081","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:500名成年人表示,他们更喜欢分配稀缺医疗干预措施的公平性和道德性。他们还完成了智商测试,这是一项衡量自尊和他们对正义世界的信仰程度的测试,以及一般阴谋理论。结果证实了之前的研究,这些研究表明,功利主义者强烈倾向于“拯救大多数生命”,其次是“病情最严重的优先”和“最年轻的优先”偏好。相关性和回归表明,分配偏好的显著个体差异相关性相对较少,智商是主要例外。讨论了影响和局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Consensual ideas for prioritizing patients: correlates of preferences in the allocation of medical resources
ABSTRACT Five hundred adults indicated their preferences about the fairness and ethics of allocating scarce medical interventions. They also completed an IQ test, a measure of self-esteem and the extent to which they believed in a Just World, as well as General Conspiracy Theories. Results confirmed previous studies which showed a strong preference for the Utilitarian “saves most lives,” followed by the Prioritization “sickest first” and “youngest first,” preferences. Correlations and regressions indicated relatively few significant individual difference correlates of allocation preferences, with IQ being the major exception. Implications and limitations are discussed.
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
Ethics & Behavior
Ethics & Behavior Multiple-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
×
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