Broad Medical Uncertainty and the ethical obligation for openness

被引:6
|
作者
Brown, Rebecca C. H. [1 ]
de Barra, Micheal [2 ]
Earp, Brian D. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oxford, Oxford Uehiro Ctr Pract Eth, Oxford, England
[2] Brunel Univ London, Ctr Culture & Evolut, London, England
基金
英国惠康基金;
关键词
Medicine; Ethics; Evidence based medicine; Science communication; Trust; CONFLICTS-OF-INTEREST; COMMUNICATING UNCERTAINTY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS; CLINICAL-PRACTICE; DECISION-MAKING; PUBLIC TRUST; HEALTH; RISK; CARE; QUALITY;
D O I
10.1007/s11229-022-03666-2
中图分类号
N09 [自然科学史]; B [哲学、宗教];
学科分类号
01 ; 0101 ; 010108 ; 060207 ; 060305 ; 0712 ;
摘要
This paper argues that there exists a collective epistemic state of 'Broad Medical Uncertainty' (BMU) regarding the effectiveness of many medical interventions. We outline the features of BMU, and describe some of the main contributing factors. These include flaws in medical research methodologies, bias in publication practices, financial and other conflicts of interest, and features of how evidence is translated into practice. These result in a significant degree of uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of many medical treatments and unduly optimistic beliefs about the benefit/harm profiles of such treatments. We argue for an ethical presumption in favour of openness regarding BMU as part of a 'Corrective Response'. We then consider some objections to this position (the 'Anti-Corrective Response'), including concerns that public honesty about flaws in medical research could undermine trust in healthcare institutions. We suggest that, as it stands, the Anti-Corrective Response is unconvincing.
引用
收藏
页数:29
相关论文
共 50 条