for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords
help
  Subjects -> HEALTH AND SAFETY (Total: 1424 journals)
    - CIVIL DEFENSE (22 journals)
    - DRUG ABUSE AND ALCOHOLISM (86 journals)
    - HEALTH AND SAFETY (641 journals)
    - HEALTH FACILITIES AND ADMINISTRATION (379 journals)
    - OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY (103 journals)
    - PHYSICAL FITNESS AND HYGIENE (112 journals)
    - WOMEN'S HEALTH (81 journals)

HEALTH AND SAFETY (641 journals)                  1 2 3 4 | Last

Showing 1 - 200 of 203 Journals sorted alphabetically
16 de Abril     Open Access  
Acta Informatica Medica     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Acta Scientiarum. Health Sciences     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Adultspan Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Advances in Child Development and Behavior     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 10)
Advances in Public Health     Open Access   (Followers: 25)
African Health Sciences     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
African Journal for Physical, Health Education, Recreation and Dance     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
African Journal of Health Professions Education     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Afrimedic Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Ageing & Society     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 43)
Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
AJOB Primary Research     Partially Free   (Followers: 3)
American Journal of Family Therapy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
American Journal of Health Economics     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 16)
American Journal of Health Education     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 32)
American Journal of Health Promotion     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 31)
American Journal of Health Sciences     Open Access   (Followers: 9)
American Journal of Health Studies     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 12)
American Journal of Preventive Medicine     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 28)
American Journal of Public Health     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 245)
American Journal of Public Health Research     Open Access   (Followers: 28)
American Medical Writers Association Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Analytic Methods in Accident Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Annales des Sciences de la Santé     Open Access  
Annali dell'Istituto Superiore di Sanità     Open Access  
Annals of Global Health     Open Access   (Followers: 10)
Annals of Health Law     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Annals of Tropical Medicine and Public Health     Open Access   (Followers: 13)
Applied Biosafety     Hybrid Journal  
Applied Research In Health And Social Sciences: Interface And Interaction     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Apuntes Universitarios     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Archive of Community Health     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Archives of Medicine and Health Sciences     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Arquivos de Ciências da Saúde     Open Access  
Asia Pacific Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
Asia Pacific Journal of Health Management     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Asia-Pacific Journal of Public Health     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
Asian Journal of Gambling Issues and Public Health     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Atención Primaria     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Australasian Journal of Paramedicine     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Australian Advanced Aesthetics     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Australian Family Physician     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Australian Indigenous HealthBulletin     Free   (Followers: 7)
Autism & Developmental Language Impairments     Open Access   (Followers: 10)
Behavioral Healthcare     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Bijzijn     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Bijzijn XL     Hybrid Journal  
Biomedical Safety & Standards     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 8)
Birat Journal of Health Sciences     Open Access  
BLDE University Journal of Health Sciences     Open Access  
BMC Oral Health     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth     Open Access   (Followers: 22)
BMJ Simulation & Technology Enhanced Learning     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
Boletin Médico de Postgrado     Open Access  
Brazilian Journal of Medicine and Human Health     Open Access  
Buletin Penelitian Kesehatan     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Buletin Penelitian Sistem Kesehatan     Open Access  
Bulletin of the World Health Organization     Open Access   (Followers: 19)
Cadernos de Educação, Saúde e Fisioterapia     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Cadernos Saúde Coletiva     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
Canadian Family Physician     Partially Free   (Followers: 13)
Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 11)
Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Canadian Journal of Public Health     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 23)
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Carta Comunitaria     Open Access  
Case Reports in Women's Health     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Case Studies in Fire Safety     Open Access   (Followers: 23)
Central Asian Journal of Global Health     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
CES Medicina     Open Access  
Child Abuse Research in South Africa     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Child's Nervous System     Hybrid Journal  
Childhood Obesity and Nutrition     Open Access   (Followers: 11)
Children     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
CHRISMED Journal of Health and Research     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Christian Journal for Global Health     Open Access  
Ciência & Saúde Coletiva     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Ciencia e Innovación en Salud     Open Access  
Ciencia y Cuidado     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Ciencia y Salud Virtual     Open Access  
Ciencia, Tecnología y Salud     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Clinical and Experimental Health Sciences     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Clocks & Sleep     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
CME     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
CoDAS     Open Access  
Community Health     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Conflict and Health     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Contraception and Reproductive Medicine     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Cuadernos de la Escuela de Salud Pública     Open Access  
Curare     Open Access  
Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
Day Surgery Australia     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Digital Health     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
Diversity of Research in Health Journal     Open Access  
Dramatherapy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Drogues, santé et société     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Duazary     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Düzce Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi / Journal of Duzce University Health Sciences Institute     Open Access  
Early Childhood Research Quarterly     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 21)
East African Journal of Public Health     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Eating and Weight Disorders - Studies on Anorexia, Bulimia and Obesity     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 22)
EcoHealth     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
Education for Health     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
electronic Journal of Health Informatics     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
ElectronicHealthcare     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Elsevier Ergonomics Book Series     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Emergency Services SA     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Ensaios e Ciência: Ciências Biológicas, Agrárias e da Saúde     Open Access  
Environmental Disease     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Environmental Sciences Europe     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Epidemics     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Epidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Public Health     Open Access   (Followers: 19)
Ethics & Human Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Ethics, Medicine and Public Health     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
Ethiopian Journal of Health Development     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Ethnicity & Health     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
Eurasian Journal of Health Technology Assessment     Open Access  
European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
European Medical, Health and Pharmaceutical Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Evaluation & the Health Professions     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
Evidence-based Medicine & Public Health     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Evidência - Ciência e Biotecnologia - Interdisciplinar     Open Access  
Expressa Extensão     Open Access  
Face à face     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Families, Systems, & Health     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 9)
Family & Community Health     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
Family Medicine and Community Health     Open Access   (Followers: 9)
Family Relations     Partially Free   (Followers: 13)
Fatigue : Biomedicine, Health & Behavior     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Finnish Journal of eHealth and eWelfare : Finjehew     Open Access  
Food and Public Health     Open Access   (Followers: 16)
Food Quality and Safety     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Frontiers in Public Health     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Gaceta Sanitaria     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Galen Medical Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Ganesha Journal     Open Access  
Gazi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi     Open Access  
Geospatial Health     Open Access  
Gesundheitsökonomie & Qualitätsmanagement     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
Giornale Italiano di Health Technology Assessment     Full-text available via subscription  
Global Challenges     Open Access  
Global Health : Science and Practice     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Global Health Promotion     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 15)
Global Journal of Health Science     Open Access   (Followers: 10)
Global Journal of Public Health     Open Access   (Followers: 13)
Global Medical & Health Communication     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Global Mental Health     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Global Reproductive Health     Open Access  
Global Security : Health, Science and Policy     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Globalization and Health     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Hacia la Promoción de la Salud     Open Access  
Hastane Öncesi Dergisi     Open Access  
Hastings Center Report     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
HCU Journal     Open Access  
HEADline     Hybrid Journal  
Health & Place     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 15)
Health & Justice     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Health : An Interdisciplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health, Illness and Medicine     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
Health and Human Rights     Free   (Followers: 10)
Health and Social Care Chaplaincy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
Health and Social Work     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 58)
Health Behavior and Policy Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Health Care Analysis     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 16)
Health Equity     Open Access  
Health Inform     Full-text available via subscription  
Health Information Management Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 24)
Health Issues     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Health Notions     Open Access  
Health Policy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 45)
Health Policy and Technology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Health Professional Student Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Health Promotion International     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 22)
Health Promotion Journal of Australia : Official Journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 8)
Health Promotion Practice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 16)
Health Prospect     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Health Psychology     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 52)
Health Psychology Bulletin     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Health Psychology Research     Open Access   (Followers: 20)
Health Psychology Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 42)
Health Renaissance     Open Access  
Health Research Policy and Systems     Open Access   (Followers: 15)
Health SA Gesondheid     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Health Science Reports     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Health Sciences and Disease     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Health Security     Hybrid Journal  
Health Services Insights     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Health Systems     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Health Voices     Full-text available via subscription  
Health, Culture and Society     Open Access   (Followers: 13)
Health, Risk & Society     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14)
Healthcare     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Healthcare in Low-resource Settings     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Healthcare Quarterly     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 9)
Healthcare Technology Letters     Open Access  

        1 2 3 4 | Last

Similar Journals
Journal Cover
Health Care Analysis
Journal Prestige (SJR): 0.445
Citation Impact (citeScore): 1
Number of Followers: 16  
 
  Hybrid Journal Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
ISSN (Print) 1573-3394 - ISSN (Online) 1065-3058
Published by Springer-Verlag Homepage  [2351 journals]
  • Co-production and Managing Uncertainty in Health Research Regulation: A
           Delphi Study
    • Abstract: European and international regulation of human health research is typified by a morass of interconnecting laws, diverse and divergent ethical frameworks, and national and transnational standards. There is also a tendency for legislators to regulate in silos—that is, in discrete fields of scientific activity without due regard to the need to make new knowledge as generalisable as possible. There are myriad challenges for the stakeholders—researchers and regulators alike—who attempt to navigate these landscapes. This Delphi study was undertaken in order to provide the first interdisciplinary and crosscutting analysis of health research regulation, as it is experienced by such stakeholders in the UK context. As well as reinforcing existing understandings of the regulatory environment, Delphi participants called for greater collaboration, and even co-production, of processes involved in health research regulation. On the basis of this research, we offer insights about how health research regulation can become a matter with which a wider range of stakeholders—including researchers, regulators, publics and research sponsors—can engage. The evidence supports the normative claim that health research regulation should continue to move away from strict, prescriptive rules-based approaches, and towards flexible principle-based regimes that allow researchers, regulators and publics to co-produce regulatory systems serving core principles. By unpacking thorny concepts and practices at the heart of health research regulation—including the public interest and public engagement—our results have the potential to situate and breathe life into them. The results also demonstrate that while proportionality is well-recognised as a crucial element of flexible regulatory systems, more must be done to operationalise this as an ethical assessment of the values and risks at stake at multiple junctures in the research trajectory. This is required if we are to move beyond proportionality as a mere risk-management tool. Compliance culture no longer accurately reflects the needs and expectations of researchers or regulators, nor does it necessarily produce the best research. Embracing uncertainty—both as a human practice and a regulatory objective—may represent the brighter future for health research.
      PubDate: 2019-08-31
       
  • Quality of Life and Value Assessment in Health Care
    • Abstract: Proposals for health care cost containment emphasize high-value care as a way to control spending without compromising quality. When used in this context, ‘value’ refers to outcomes in relation to cost. To determine where health spending yields the most value, it is necessary to compare the benefits provided by different treatments. While many studies focus narrowly on health gains in assessing value, the notion of benefit is sometimes broadened to include overall quality of life. This paper explores the implications of using subjective quality of life measures for value assessment. This approach is claimed to be more respectful of patients and better capture the perspectival nature of quality of life. Even if this is correct, though, subjective measurement also raises challenging issues of interpersonal comparability when used to study health outcomes. Because such measures do not readily distinguish benefits due to medical interventions from benefits due to personal or other factors, they are not easily applied to the assessment of treatment value. I argue that when the outcome of interest in value assessment is broadened to include quality of life, the cost side of these measures should also be broadened. I show how one philosophical theory of well-being, Jason Raibley’s “agential flourishing” theory, can be adapted for use in quality of life research to better fit the needs and aims of value assessment in health care. Finally, I briefly note some implications of this argument for debates about fairness in health care allocations.
      PubDate: 2019-07-23
       
  • Conceptualising Surgical Innovation: An Eliminativist Proposal
    • Abstract: Improving surgical interventions is key to improving outcomes. Ensuring the safe and transparent translation of such improvements is essential. Evaluation and governance initiatives, including the IDEAL framework and the Macquarie Surgical Innovation Identification Tool have begun to address this. Yet without a definition of innovation that allows non-surgeons to identify when it is occurring, these initiatives are of limited value. A definition seems elusive, so we undertook a conceptual study of surgical innovation. This indicated common conceptual areas in discussions of (surgical) innovation, that we categorised alliteratively under the themes of “purpose” (about drivers of innovation), “place” (about contexts of innovation), “process” (about differentiating innovation), “product” (about tangible and intangible results of innovation) and “person” (about personal factors and viewpoint). These conceptual areas are used in varying—sometimes contradictory—ways in different discussions. Highlighting these conceptual areas of surgical innovation may be useful in clarifying what should be reported in registries of innovation. However our wider conclusion was that the term “innovation” carries too much conceptual baggage to inform normative inquiry about surgical practice. Instead, we propose elimination of the term “innovation” from serious discourse aimed at evaluation and regulation of surgery. In our view researchers, philosophers and policy-makers should consider what it is about surgical activity that needs attention and develop robust definitions to identify these areas: for our own focus on transparency and safety, this means finding criteria that can objectively identify certain risk profiles during the development of surgery.
      PubDate: 2019-07-20
       
  • NICE and Fair' Health Technology Assessment Policy Under the UK’s
           National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, 1999–2018
    • Abstract: The UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is responsible for conducting health technology assessment (HTA) on behalf of the National Health Service (NHS). In seeking to justify its recommendations to the NHS about which technologies to fund, NICE claims to adopt two complementary ethical frameworks, one procedural—accountability for reasonableness (AfR)—and one substantive—an ‘ethics of opportunity costs’ (EOC) that rests primarily on the notion of allocative efficiency. This study is the first to empirically examine normative changes to NICE’s approach and to analyse whether these enhance or diminish the fairness of its decision-making, as judged against these frameworks. It finds that increasing formalisation of NICE’s approach and a weakening of the burden of proof laid on technologies undergoing HTA have together undermined its commitment to EOC. This implies a loss of allocative efficiency and a shift in the balance of how the interests of different NHS users are served, in favour of those who benefit directly from NICE’s recommendations. These changes also weaken NICE’s commitment to AfR by diminishing the publicity of its decision-making and by encouraging the adoption of rationales that cannot easily be shown to meet the relevance condition. This signals a need for either substantial reform of NICE’s approach, or more accurate communication of the ethical reasoning on which it is based. The study also highlights the need for further empirical work to explore the impact of these policy changes on NICE’s practice of HTA and to better understand how and why they have come about.
      PubDate: 2019-07-19
       
  • Austerity, Health and Ethics
    • PubDate: 2019-07-17
       
  • Moral Distress and Austerity: An Avoidable Ethical Challenge in Healthcare
    • Abstract: Austerity, by its very nature, imposes constraints by limiting the options for action available to us because certain courses of action are too costly or insufficiently cost effective. In the context of healthcare, the constraints imposed by austerity come in various forms; ranging from the availability of certain treatments being reduced or withdrawn completely, to reductions in staffing that mean healthcare professionals must ration the time they make available to each patient. As austerity has taken hold, across the United Kingdom and Europe, it is important to consider the wider effects of the constraints that it imposes in healthcare. Within this paper, we focus specifically on one theorised effect—moral distress. We differentiate between avoidable and unavoidable ethical challenges within healthcare and argue that austerity creates additional avoidable ethical problems that exacerbate clinicians’ moral distress. We suggest that moral resilience is a suitable response to clinician moral distress caused by unavoidable ethical challenges but additional responses are required to address those that are created due to austerity. We encourage clinicians to engage in critical resilience and activism to address problems created by austerity and we highlight the responsibility of institutions to support healthcare professionals in such challenging times.
      PubDate: 2019-07-17
       
  • A Capabilities Approach to Prenatal Screening for Fetal Abnormalities
    • Abstract: International guidelines recommend that prenatal screening for fetal abnormalities should only be offered within a non-directive framework aimed at enabling women in making meaningful reproductive choices. Whilst this position is widely endorsed, developments in cell-free fetal DNA based Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing are now raising questions about its continued suitability for guiding screening policy and practice. This issue is most apparent within debates on the scope of the screening offer. Implied by the aim of enabling meaningful reproductive choices is the idea that screening services should support women in accessing prenatal tests that best enable them to realize the types of reproductive choice that they find important. However, beyond whatever options meet the quality standards required for facilitating an informed decision, the remaining criteria of facilitating autonomous choice is strictly non-directive. As a result, policy makers receive little indication prior to consultation with each individual woman, about what conditions should be prioritized during the offer of screening. In this paper we try to address this issue by using the capabilities approach to further specify the non-directive aim of enabling meaningful reproductive choice. The resulting framework is then used to assess the relative importance of offering prenatal screening where concerning different types of genetic condition. We conclude that greater priority may be ascribed to offering prenatal screening for conditions that more significantly diminish a woman’s central capabilities. It follows that serious congenital and earlier-onset conditions are more likely to fulfill these criteria.
      PubDate: 2019-07-15
       
  • Neo-Liberalism, Austerity and the Political Determinants of Health
    • PubDate: 2019-07-11
       
  • A Historical View on Health Care: A New View on Austerity'
    • Abstract: It is an axiom of contemporary conversations about austerity and health care that the relationship between the two is essentially direct. Cutting funds damages health care systems and hurts the health of individuals who rely on them. Though this premise has provoked necessary discussion about global politics, the global economy and their impact on individual well-being, it is nonetheless intrinsically problematic. Assigning health and health care as objects of austerity not only obscures the complexity of health care systems and the opacity of health’s definitional borders, but also misunderstands austerity, its manifestations and its significance. The ambition of this essay is to bring health care back into the debate, in order to establish the greater dynamism of the contemporary austerity and health care relationship. This historical reconstruction will challenge the significance of our current situating of austerity as health care’s bogeyman, press for a reconsideration of our contemporary definitions of the key factors involved here (health, health care and austerity) and finally conclude with some thoughts on how we might more productively approach the problem of health now.
      PubDate: 2019-06-27
       
  • Austerity and Professionalism: Being a Good Healthcare Professional in Bad
           Conditions
    • Abstract: In this paper we argue that austerity creates working conditions that can undermine professionalism in healthcare. We characterise austerity in terms of overlapping economic, social and ethical dimensions and explain how these can pose significant challenges for healthcare professionals. Amongst other things, austerity is detrimental to healthcare practice because it creates shortages of material and staff resources, negatively affects relationships and institutional cultures, and creates increased burdens and pressures for staff, not least as a result of deteriorating public health conditions. After discussing the multiple dimensions of austerity, we consider the challenges it creates for professional ethics in healthcare. We highlight three mechanisms—intensification of work, practitioner isolation, and organisational alienation—which pose acute problems for healthcare professionals working under conditions of austerity. These mechanisms can turn ‘routine moral stress’ into moral distress and, at the same time, make poor care much more likely. While professionalism clearly depends on individual capabilities and behaviours, it also depends upon a complex sets of social conditions being established and maintained. The problems caused by austerity reveal a need to broaden the scope of professional ethics so that it includes the responsibilities of ‘role constructors’ and not just ‘role occupiers’. Austerity therefore presents opportunities for health professionals and associated ‘role constructors’ to contribute to a reimagining of future models of healthcare professionalism.
      PubDate: 2019-06-05
       
  • Austerity or Xenophobia' The Causes and Costs of the “Hostile
           Environment” in the NHS
    • Abstract: During the “age of austerity” the UK government has progressively limited free health services for “overseas visitors” on the grounds of fairness and frugality. This is despite the fact that the cost of the additional bureaucracy required by the new system and the public health consequences are expected to exceed the sums saved. In this article I explore the interaction between the discourses of austerity and xenophobia as they relate to migrants’ access to healthcare. By examining the available data and adjudicating various moral arguments, I cast doubt on the claim that the current charging regulations are cost-effective and fair. I instead contend that if the UK is concerned with running a health service that is economically-sustainable and morally-defensible, it is critical that migrants are welcomed, both as staff and as patients. I conclude by arguing that xenophobia has precipitated changes to the health service which do not qualify as “austerity” in the way that is claimed, but rather deliberately produce a “hostile environment” for migrants, despite this very likely generating economic losses.
      PubDate: 2019-06-03
       
  • Between the Reasonable and the Particular: Deflating Autonomy in the Legal
           Regulation of Informed Consent to Medical Treatment
    • Abstract: The law of informed consent to medical treatment has recently been extensively overhauled in England. The 2015 Montgomery judgment has done away with the long-held position that the information to be disclosed by doctors when obtaining valid consent from patients should be determined on the basis of what a reasonable body of medical opinion agree ought to be disclosed in the circumstances. The UK Supreme Court concluded that the information that is material to a patient’s decision should instead be judged by reference to a new two-limbed test founded on the notions of the ‘reasonable person’ and the ‘particular patient’. The rationale outlined in Montgomery for this new test of materiality, and academic comment on the ruling’s significance, has focused on the central ethical importance that the law now (rightfully) accords to respect for patient autonomy in the process of obtaining consent from patients. In this paper, we dispute the claim that the new test of materiality articulated in Montgomery equates with respect for autonomy being given primacy in re-shaping the development of the law in this area. We also defend this position, arguing that our revised interpretation of Montgomery’s significance does not equate with a failure by the courts to give due legal consideration to what is owed to patients as autonomous decision-makers in the consent process. Instead, Montgomery correctly implies that doctors are ethically (and legally) obliged to attend to a number of relevant ethical considerations in framing decisions about consent to treatment, which include subtle interpretations of the values of autonomy and well-being. Doctors should give appropriate consideration to how these values are fleshed out and balanced in context in order to specify precisely what information ought to be disclosed to a patient as a requirement of obtaining consent, and as a core component of shared decision-making within medical encounters more generally.
      PubDate: 2019-06-01
       
  • Principles of Need and the Aggregation Thesis
    • Abstract: Principles of need are constantly referred to in health care priority setting. The common denominator for any principle of need is that it will ascribe some kind of special normative weight to people being worse off. However, this common ground does not answer the question how a plausible principle of need should relate to the aggregation of benefits across individuals. Principles of need are sometimes stated as being incompatible with aggregation and sometimes characterized as accepting aggregation in much the same way as utilitarians do. In this paper we argue that if one wants to take principles of need seriously both of these positions have unreasonable implications. We then characterize and defend a principle of need consisting of sufficientarian elements as well as prioritarian which avoids these unreasonable implications.
      PubDate: 2019-06-01
       
  • Evidence, Emotion and Eminence: A Qualitative and Evaluative Analysis of
           Doctors’ Skills in Macroallocation
    • Abstract: In this analysis of the ethical dimensions of doctors’ participation in macroallocation we set out to understand the skills they use, how they are acquired, and how they influence performance of the role. Using the principles of grounded moral analysis, we conducted a semi-structured interview study with Australian doctors engaged in macroallocation. We found that they performed expertise as argument, bringing together phronetic and rhetorical skills founded on communication, strategic thinking, finance, and health data. They had made significant, purposeful efforts to gain skills for the role. Our findings challenge common assumptions about doctors’ preferences in argumentation, and reveal an unexpected commitment to practical reason. Using the ethics of Paul Ricoeur in our analysis enabled us to identify the moral meaning of doctors’ skills and learning. We concluded that Ricoeur’s ethics offers an empirically grounded matrix for ethical analysis of the doctor’s role in macroallocation that may help to establish norms for procedure.
      PubDate: 2019-06-01
       
  • Empathy and Efficiency in Healthcare at Times of Austerity
    • Abstract: Efficiency is an important value for all publicly funded healthcare systems. Limited resources need to be used prudently and wisely in order to ensure best possible outcomes and waste avoidance. Since 2010, the drive for efficiency, in the UK, has acquired a new impetus, as the country embarked on an ‘age of austerity’ purportedly to balance its books and reduce national deficit. Although the NHS did not suffer any direct budget cuts, the austerity policies imposed on the welfare system, including social and mental healthcare, have had a direct and detrimental impact on the healthcare service. This paper draws from a qualitative study conducted in three A&E Departments in England to explore the effects of austerity policies on the everyday experiences of doctors and nurses working in Emergency Departments. It discusses the operationalisation of efficiency in A&E, in a climate of austerity, and its effects on the experiences and practices of healthcare professionals. It uses the empirical data as a springboard to highlight the role of structures and regulations, in this case targets and protocols, in how core healthcare ethical values, such as empathy, are exercised in practice. It provides an analysis of the normative role structures and regulations can play on the perception and practice of professional duties and obligations in healthcare.
      PubDate: 2019-05-31
       
  • Severity as a Priority Setting Criterion: Setting a Challenging Research
           Agenda
    • Abstract: Priority setting in health care is ubiquitous and health authorities are increasingly recognising the need for priority setting guidelines to ensure efficient, fair, and equitable resource allocation. While cost-effectiveness concerns seem to dominate many policies, the tension between utilitarian and deontological concerns is salient to many, and various severity criteria appear to fill this gap. Severity, then, must be subjected to rigorous ethical and philosophical analysis. Here we first give a brief history of the path to today’s severity criteria in Norway and Sweden. The Scandinavian perspective on severity might be conducive to the international discussion, given its long-standing use as a priority setting criterion, despite having reached rather different conclusions so far. We then argue that severity can be viewed as a multidimensional concept, drawing on accounts of need, urgency, fairness, duty to save lives, and human dignity. Such concerns will often be relative to local mores, and the weighting placed on the various dimensions cannot be expected to be fixed. Thirdly, we present what we think are the most pertinent questions to answer about severity in order to facilitate decision making in the coming years of increased scarcity, and to further the understanding of underlying assumptions and values that go into these decisions. We conclude that severity is poorly understood, and that the topic needs substantial further inquiry; thus we hope this article may set a challenging and important research agenda.
      PubDate: 2019-05-22
       
  • Risk, Overdiagnosis and Ethical Justifications
    • Abstract: Many healthcare practices expose people to risks of harmful outcomes. However, the major theories of moral philosophy struggle to assess whether, when and why it is ethically justifiable to expose individuals to risks, as opposed to actually harming them. Sven Ove Hansson has proposed an approach to the ethical assessment of risk imposition that encourages attention to factors including questions of justice in the distribution of advantage and risk, people’s acceptance or otherwise of risks, and the scope individuals have to influence the practices that generate risk. This paper investigates the ethical justifiability of preventive healthcare practices that expose people to risks including overdiagnosis. We applied Hansson’s framework to three such practices: an ‘ideal’ breast screening service, a commercial personal genome testing service, and a guideline that lowers the diagnostic threshold for hypertension. The framework was challenging to apply, not least because healthcare has unclear boundaries and involves highly complex practices. Nonetheless, the framework encouraged attention to issues that would be widely recognised as morally pertinent. Our assessment supports the view that at least some preventive healthcare practices that impose risks including that of overdiagnosis are not ethically justifiable. Further work is however needed to develop and/or test refined assessment criteria and guidance for applying them.
      PubDate: 2019-05-04
       
  • Why the Elective Caesarean Lottery is Ethically Impermissible
    • Abstract: In the United Kingdom the law and medical guidance is supportive of women making choices in childbirth. NICE guidelines are explicit that a competent woman’s informed request for MRCS (elective caesarean in the absence of any clinical indications) should be respected. However, in reality pregnant women are routinely denied MRCS. In this paper I consider whether there is sufficient justification for restricting MRCS. The physical and emotive significance of childbirth as an event in a woman’s life cannot be understated. It is, therefore, concerning that women are having their wishes ignored, and we must ascertain whether the denial of agency is justifiable. To answer this question I first demonstrate that access to MRCS is a lottery in the UK. Second, I argue that there is nothing unique about pregnancy that displaces the ethical norm of respecting patents’ sufficiently autonomous choices. Thus, the starting presumption is that all informed choices regarding MRCS should be respected. To ascertain whether any restriction of MRCS is justifiable the burden of proof must be placed on those who argue that MRCS is ethically impermissible. I argue that the most common justifications in the literature against MRCS are insufficient to displace the presumption in favour of autonomous choice in childbirth. I conclude that MRCS should be available to pregnant women, and we must strive to reduce the lottery in access to choice.
      PubDate: 2019-04-29
       
  • Irresponsibly Infertile' Obesity, Efficiency, and Exclusion from
           Treatment
    • Abstract: Many countries tightly ration access to publicly funded fertility treatments such as in vitro fertilisation (IVF). One basis for excluding people from access to IVF is their body mass index. In this paper, I consider a number of potential justifications for such a policy, based on claims about effectiveness and cost-efficiency, and reject these as unsupported by available evidence. I consider an alternative justification: that those whose subfertility results from avoidable behaviours for which they are responsible are less deserving of treatment. I ultimately stop short of endorsing or rejecting such a justification, though highlight some reasons for thinking it is unlikely to be practicable.
      PubDate: 2019-03-08
       
  • Are We Justified in Introducing Carbon Monoxide Testing to Encourage
           Smoking Cessation in Pregnant Women'
    • Authors: Catherine Bowden
      Abstract: Smoking is frequently presented as being particularly problematic when the smoker is a pregnant woman because of the potential harm to the future child. This premise is used to justify targeting pregnant women with a unique approach to smoking cessation including policies such as the routine testing of all pregnant women for carbon monoxide at every antenatal appointment. This paper examines the evidence that such policies are justified by the aim of harm prevention and argues that targeting pregnant women in this way is likely to do more harm than good. Routine carbon monoxide testing is particularly problematic as it sends a message to pregnant women that they cannot be trusted either to truthfully answer questions as to whether or not they smoke, or to make decisions in the best interests of themselves and their future children in the way that non-pregnant individuals are. Further, if the aim is to reduce rates of prenatal harm, the evidence suggests that adopting a supportive and empowering approach to prenatal care is the most effective way to achieve this, something that the current policies aimed at pregnant women are in conflict with.
      PubDate: 2018-12-05
      DOI: 10.1007/s10728-018-0364-z
       
 
 
JournalTOCs
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Email: journaltocs@hw.ac.uk
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
Fax: +00 44 (0)131 4513327
 
About JournalTOCs
API
Help
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-