Dissent and Disputes

异议和争议
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:医疗纠纷,这在中国很普遍,是一个日益严重的全球公共卫生问题。中国政府已提议第三方调解(TPM)来解决这一问题。然而,的特点,效率,TPM在解决我国公立医院医疗纠纷中的作用及影响因素尚待确定。
    方法:我们使用2014-2019年中国甘肃省医疗纠纷的TPM记录进行了系统研究。采用χ2检验比较组间差异,并进行二元Logistic分析以确定影响TPM选择解决医疗纠纷的因素。
    结果:我们分析了甘肃省5,948份TPM医疗纠纷记录。2014年至2019年,甘肃省公立医院医疗纠纷数量和赔偿金额逐年增加,大部分纠纷发生在二级和三级医院。约89.01%的医疗纠纷由TPM处理;TPM的平均赔偿金额为人民币48,688.73元,大大低于法院判决和司法调解的赔偿金额。TPM在结论:我们的研究结果表明,TPM机制在有效降低赔偿金额和提高医疗纠纷解决率方面发挥了积极作用,这是甘肃省公立医院解决医疗纠纷的主要方法。TPM可以帮助大大减少医生和患者之间的冲突,避免诉讼,并为双方节省时间和成本。此外,补偿金额,非致命的结果,无过错责任的确定影响了TPM解决医疗纠纷的选择。
    BACKGROUND: Medical disputes, which are prevalent in China, are a growing global public health problem. The Chinese government has proposed third-party mediation (TPM) to resolve this issue. However, the characteristics, efficiency, and influencing factors of TPM in resolving medical disputes in public hospitals in China have yet to be determined.
    METHODS: We conducted a systematic study using TPM records from medical disputes in Gansu Province in China from 2014 to 2019. A χ2 test was used to compare differences between groups, and binary logistic analysis was performed to determine the factors influencing the choice of TPM for resolving medical disputes.
    RESULTS: We analyzed 5,948 TPM records of medical disputes in Gansu Province in China. The number of medical disputes and the amount of compensation awarded in public hospitals in the Gansu Province increased annually from 2014 to 2019, with most of the disputes occurring in secondary and tertiary hospitals. Approximately 89.01% of the medical disputes were handled by TPM; the average compensation amount with TPM was Chinese Yuan (CNY) 48,688.73, significantly less than that awarded via court judgment and judicial mediation. TPM was more likely to succeed in settling medical disputes in the < CNY10,000 compensation group than in the no-compensation group (odds ratio [OR] = 3.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.53-6.45). However, as the compensation amount increased, the likelihood of choosing TPM decreased significantly. Moreover, TPM was less likely to be chosen when medical disputes did not involve death (OR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.36-0.45) or when no-fault liability was determined (vs. medical accidents; OR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.20-0.67).
    CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that TPM mechanisms play a positive role in efficiently reducing compensation amounts and increasing medical dispute resolution rates which was the main settlement method in resolving medical disputes in public hospitals of Gansu Province in China. TPM could help greatly reduce conflicts between doctors and patients, avoid litigation, and save time and costs for both parties. Moreover, compensation amounts, non-fatal outcomes, and no-fault liability determinations influence the choice of TPM for settling medical disputes.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    本文分析了利用调解解决精神行为能力法纠纷,包括在医疗保健环境中出现的那些。它借鉴了原始的经验数据,包括采访律师和调解员,以及调解方案的分析,认为调解有可能成为心理能力法中一种有效的解决方法。它强调了调解的关系利益,同时承认确保P的参与和最大利益的挑战。本文的最后一部分考虑了调解如何在最具挑战性的医疗保健环境之一中运作,重症监护室。本文强调,我们在调解中看到的挑战并不独特,并且在保护法院的实践中都存在。因此,本文的结论是,调解可以得到有效利用,但司法管辖区也将受益于更清晰的监管框架。
    This article analyses the use of mediation to resolve mental capacity law disputes, including those that arise in the healthcare context. It draws on original empirical data, including interviews with lawyers and mediators, and analysis of a mediation scheme, to argue that mediation has the potential to be an effective method of resolution in mental capacity law. It highlights the relationship benefits of mediation while acknowledging the challenges of securing P\'s participation and best interests. The final section of the article considers how mediation can operate in one of the most challenging healthcare environments, the Intensive Care Unit. The article emphasizes that the challenges we see in mediation are not unique and exist across the spectrum of Court of Protection practice. Therefore, the article concludes that mediation may be used effectively but the jurisdiction would also benefit from a clearer regulatory framework in which it can operate.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:日益先进和昂贵的新医疗技术的可用性给公共资助的医疗保健系统带来了相当大的压力。决定不或不再从公共资金中偿还健康技术可能变得不可避免。尽管如此,政策制定者经常被迫修改或撤销负面的报销决定,因为公众通常会在这些决定之后产生分歧。在媒体上发布个别患者的照片可能会加剧公众的分歧。我们的目的是评估描绘受负面报销决定影响的患者对公众不同意该决定的影响。
    方法:我们在荷兰的一个具有代表性的公众样本(n=1008)中进行了一项离散选择实验,并评估了受访者“不同意政策制定者”决定不为两个患者组之一报销新药的可能性。我们为一个患者组提供了受决定影响的患者之一的图片,而另一组则为“无图片”。根据患者年龄对这些组进行描述,治疗前与健康相关的生活质量(HRQOL)和预期寿命(LE),以及HRQOL和LE从治疗中获得的收益。我们应用随机截距logit回归模型来分析数据。
    结果:我们的结果表明,当患者的照片出现时,受访者更有可能不同意否定的报销决定。与其他实证研究的结果一致,当患者相对年轻时,受访者也更有可能不同意这一决定,治疗前HRQOL和LE水平较高,和治疗带来的大量LE收益。
    结论:这项研究为描绘个体的效果提供了证据,受影响的患者在公众对医疗保健中的负面报销决定持不同意见。政策制定者最好意识到这种影响,以便他们能够预测这种影响并实施政策来减轻相关风险。
    BACKGROUND: The availability of increasingly advanced and expensive new health technologies puts considerable pressure on publicly financed healthcare systems. Decisions to not-or no longer-reimburse a health technology from public funding may become inevitable. Nonetheless, policymakers are often pressured to amend or revoke negative reimbursement decisions due to the public disagreement that typically follows such decisions. Public disagreement may be reinforced by the publication of pictures of individual patients in the media. Our aim was to assess the effect of depicting a patient affected by a negative reimbursement decision on public disagreement with the decision.
    METHODS: We conducted a discrete choice experiment in a representative sample of the public (n = 1008) in the Netherlands and assessed the likelihood of respondents\' disagreement with policymakers\' decision to not reimburse a new pharmaceutical for one of two patient groups. We presented a picture of one of the patients affected by the decision for one patient group and \"no picture available\" for the other group. The groups were described on the basis of patients\' age, health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and life expectancy (LE) before treatment, and HRQOL and LE gains from treatment. We applied random-intercept logit regression models to analyze the data.
    RESULTS: Our results indicate that respondents were more likely to disagree with the negative reimbursement decision when a picture of an affected patient was presented. Consistent with findings from other empirical studies, respondents were also more likely to disagree with the decision when patients were relatively young, had high levels of HRQOL and LE before treatment, and large LE gains from treatment.
    CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence for the effect of depicting individual, affected patients on public disagreement with negative reimbursement decisions in healthcare. Policymakers would do well to be aware of this effect so that they can anticipate it and implement policies to mitigate associated risks.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:医疗损害责任纠纷(CMDLD)的赔偿严重阻碍了医院的健康发展,破坏了医患关系的和谐。DPR中的风险管理已成为当今的紧迫问题。本研究旨在对我国CMDLD进行全面描述,并探讨其影响因素,并对DPR中的风险管理提出相应的建议。
    方法:本研究的数据来自中国判决在线-官方司法搜索网站,覆盖最全面。2015年至2021年1,790起医疗损害责任纠纷案件(COMDLD)的统计分析
    结果:COMDLD总体上呈逐年上升趋势,且各地区分布不均;补偿率为52.46%,薪酬中位数为13.49万元,最高为2234666元;单因素分析结果显示,不同年度的薪酬差异有统计学意义,regions,治疗属性,与试验程序呈显著负相关(R=-0.082,P<0.05);医院类型与地区呈显著负相关(R=-0.082,P<0.05);试验程序与年份呈显著负相关(R=-0.484,P<0.001);代偿与年份呈显著正相关,regions,和治疗属性(R=0.098-0.294,P<0.001),与试验程序呈负相关(R=-0.090,P<0.01);回归分析显示,治疗属性,和地区是影响CMDLD的主要因素(P<0.05)。
    结论:年,regions,治疗属性,和试验程序影响CMDLD的结果。本文依据实证成果进一步对医患风险治理提出了相干建议和对策。包括合理配置医疗资源,缩小地区间差异;推动优质资源扩容下沉,提高各级医院医疗服务水平;发展医疗纠纷第三方协商机制,降低医疗诉讼成本等。
    BACKGROUND: Compensation for medical damage liability disputes (CMDLD) seriously hinders the healthy development of hospitals and undermines the harmony of the doctor-patient relationships (DPR). Risk management in the DPR has become an urgent issue of the day. The study aims to provide a comprehensive description of CMDLD in China and explore its influencing factors, and make corresponding recommendations for the management of risks in the DPR.
    METHODS: This study extracted data from the China Judgment Online - the official judicial search website with the most comprehensive coverage. Statistical analysis of 1,790 litigation cases of medical damage liability disputes (COMDLD) available from 2015 to 2021.
    RESULTS: COMDLD generally tended to increase with the year and was unevenly distributed by regions; the compensation rate was 52.46%, the median compensation was 134,900 yuan and the maximum was 2,234,666 yuan; the results of the single factor analysis showed that there were statistically significant differences between the compensation for different years, regions, treatment attributes, and trial procedures (P < 0.05); the correlation analysis showed that types of hospitals were significantly negatively associated with regions (R=-0.082, P < 0.05); trial procedures were significantly negatively correlated with years (R=-0.484, P < 0.001); compensat- ion was significantly positively correlated with years, regions, and treatment attributes (R = 0.098-0.294, P < 0.001) and negatively correlated with trial procedures (R=-0.090, P < 0.01); regression analysis showed that years, treatment attributes, and regions were the main factors affecting the CMDLD (P < 0.05).
    CONCLUSIONS: Years, regions, treatment attributes, and trial procedures affect the outcome of CMDLD. This paper further puts forward relevant suggestions and countermeasures for the governance of doctor-patient risks based on the empirical results. Including rational allocation of medical resources to narrow the differences between regions; promoting the expansion and sinking of high-quality resources to improve the level of medical services in hospitals at all levels; and developing a third-party negotiation mechanism for medical disputes to reduce the cost of medical litigation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: English Abstract
    This article analyzes the tensions and disputes between the fields of gynecology and esthetic plastic surgery, the specialties which are authorized to perform aesthetic female genital surgeries in Brazil. Documentary materials are used, including scientific articles from the 1990s onward and institutional websites. While gynecologists have remained more cautious, recommending the surgery only for functional reasons, plastic surgeons have been more influential in publicizing these procedures and emphasizing the aesthetic dimension. Beyond professional disputes, we debate whether this phenomenon needs to be understood in light of the growing emphasis on self-improvement via biomedical resources and gender imperatives.
    Este artigo analisa tensões e disputas entre o campo da ginecologia e da cirurgia plástica estética, especialidades autorizadas a realizar a cirurgia estética genital feminina no Brasil. Utiliza material documental, incluindo artigos científicos desde a década de 1990, e sites institucionais. Enquanto ginecologistas têm se mantido mais cautelosos com a prática, defendendo sua realização apenas quando há indicações funcionais, cirurgiões/ãs plásticos/as têm sido mais influentes na disseminação do procedimento, privilegiando a dimensão estética. Argumenta-se que, para além de disputas entre campos profissionais, esse fenômeno precisa ser entendido à luz da crescente ênfase no aprimoramento de si, via recursos biomédicos, e dos imperativos de gênero.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    研究诚信(RI)在机构和科学政策的议程上都很重要。欧洲联盟以及国家科学部已经发起了雄心勃勃的倡议,以打击不当行为和违反研究诚信的行为。通常,这些举措需要通过机构和学术界可以用来更容易地识别和处理不当行为的指导方针来规范科学行为。与其将不当行为定性为信息赤字,相反,我们将可疑的研究实践(QRP)概念化为研究人员试图调和知识生产中不确定性的认识和社会形式。借鉴以前的文献,我们将认知不确定性定义为科学探究的内在智力不可预测性,而社会不确定性源于人为的科学工作条件。我们的核心论点是在对不同领域和欧洲国家的研究人员进行30次焦点小组访谈的基础上提出的,即破坏研究完整性可以理解为试图放松两种形式的不确定性之间过于紧密的耦合。我们的分析方法并不意味着相对或借口不当行为,而是提供一个更细粒度的观点,关于研究人员想要通过参与来实现什么。根据分析,最后,我们提出了一些具体的方法,在这些方法中,机构和学术界可以尝试在更集体的层面上调和认知和社会不确定性,从而减少了研究人员从事不当行为的动机。
    Research Integrity (RI) is high on the agenda of both institutions and science policy. The European Union as well as national ministries of science have launched ambitious initiatives to combat misconduct and breaches of research integrity. Often, such initiatives entail attempts to regulate scientific behavior through guidelines that institutions and academic communities can use to more easily identify and deal with cases of misconduct. Rather than framing misconduct as a result of an information deficit, we instead conceptualize Questionable Research Practices (QRPs) as attempts by researchers to reconcile epistemic and social forms of uncertainty in knowledge production. Drawing on previous literature, we define epistemic uncertainty as the inherent intellectual unpredictability of scientific inquiry, while social uncertainty arises from the human-made conditions for scientific work. Our core argument-developed on the basis of 30 focus group interviews with researchers across different fields and European countries-is that breaches of research integrity can be understood as attempts to loosen overly tight coupling between the two forms of uncertainty. Our analytical approach is not meant to relativize or excuse misconduct, but rather to offer a more fine-grained perspective on what exactly it is that researchers want to accomplish by engaging in it. Based on the analysis, we conclude by proposing some concrete ways in which institutions and academic communities could try to reconcile epistemic and social uncertainties on a more collective level, thereby reducing incentives for researchers to engage in misconduct.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在过去的十年中,人们对出于良心拒服兵役的医疗保健产生了浓厚的学术兴趣。虽然迄今为止的文献主要集中在反对参与道德上有争议的程序的个体医疗保健从业者,在这篇文章中,我们考虑一个不同的,尽管相关的问题,即,是否应要求公共资助的医疗机构提供道德上有争议的服务,例如堕胎,紧急避孕,自愿绝育,自愿安乐死。关于机构责任的实质性辩论在很大程度上仍然是机构拒绝提供的关于医疗实践的一级道德辩论;在本文中,我们认为,有关机构形而上学的更基本的问题为理解机构出于良心拒服兵役的基础提供了一个被忽视的途径。要做到这一点,我们阐明了制度良知的形而上学模型,并根据这种模式考虑破坏机构依良心拒服兵役的三个众所周知的论点。我们展示了我们对机构的形而上学分析如何为对认真反对的机构进行制裁辩护。因此,我们争论,有关机构形而上学的问题值得批评家和机构出于良心拒服兵役的捍卫者认真关注。
    The past decade has seen a burgeoning of scholarly interest in conscientious objection in healthcare. While the literature to date has focused primarily on individual healthcare practitioners who object to participation in morally controversial procedures, in this article we consider a different albeit related issue, namely, whether publicly funded healthcare institutions should be required to provide morally controversial services such as abortions, emergency contraception, voluntary sterilizations, and voluntary euthanasia. Substantive debates about institutional responsibility have remained largely at the level of first-order ethical debate over medical practices which institutions have refused to offer; in this article, we argue that more fundamental questions about the metaphysics of institutions provide a neglected avenue for understanding the basis of institutional conscientious objection. To do so, we articulate a metaphysical model of institutional conscience, and consider three well-known arguments for undermining institutional conscientious objection in light of this model. We show how our metaphysical analysis of institutions creates difficulties for justifying sanctions on institutions that conscientiously object. Thus, we argue, questions about the metaphysics of institutions are deserving of serious attention from both critics and defenders of institutional conscientious objection.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在分布式开发环境中基于ScrumAgile的软件开发通过促进跨地理边界的软件开发,在当代软件行业中起着举足轻重的作用。然而,在过去,用于解决Scrum敏捷分布式软件开发(SADSD)中的通信和协作等挑战的不同框架在透明度方面明显不足,安全,可追溯性,地理位置分散的定位工作协议,地理上分散的团队合作效率,和信任。这些缺陷经常导致软件开发和部署的延迟,客户不满意,取消的协议,项目失败,以及客户和开发团队之间的付款纠纷。为了应对SASD的这些挑战,本文提出了一个名为ChainAgile的新框架,利用区块链技术。ChainAgile采用私有以太坊区块链来促进智能合约的执行。这些智能合约涵盖了一系列功能,包括验收测试,安全支付,需求验证,任务优先级排序,sprintbacklog,用户故事设计和开发以及支付,通过数字钱包自动向开发团队分发付款。此外,在ChainAgile框架中,智能合约在自动对客户进行延迟付款或不付款的处罚以及对开发人员完成超过期限的任务的处罚方面也发挥着关键作用。此外,ChainAgile通过将星际文件系统(IPFS)作为链下机制用于存储解决方案,有效地解决了区块链技术固有的可扩展性限制。实验结果最终表明,这种创新的方法大大提高了透明度,可追溯性,协调,通信,安全,以及对从事scrum敏捷分布式软件开发(SADSD)的客户和开发人员的信任。
    Software Development based on Scrum Agile in a distributed development environment plays a pivotal role in the contemporary software industry by facilitating software development across geographic boundaries. However, in the past different frameworks utilized to address the challenges like communication and collaboration in scrum agile distributed software development (SADSD) were notably inadequate in transparency, security, traceability, geographically dispersed location work agreements, geographically dispersed teamwork effectiveness, and trust. These deficiencies frequently resulted in delays in software development and deployment, customer dissatisfaction, canceled agreements, project failures, and disputes over payments between customers and development teams. To address these challenges of SADSD, this paper proposes a new framework called ChainAgile, which leverages blockchain technology. ChainAgile employs a private Ethereum blockchain to facilitate the execution of smart contracts. These smart contracts cover a range of functions, including acceptance testing, secure payments, requirement verification, task prioritization, sprint backlog, user story design and development and payments with the automated distribution of payments via digital wallets to development teams. Moreover, in the ChainAgile framework, smart contracts also play a pivotal role in automatically imposing penalties on customers for making late payments or for no payments and penalties on developers for completing the tasks that exceed their deadlines. Furthermore, ChainAgile effectively addresses the scalability limitations intrinsic in blockchain technology by incorporating the Interplanetary File System (IPFS) is used for storage solutions as an off-chain mechanism. The experimental results conclusively show that this innovative approach substantially improves transparency, traceability, coordination, communication, security, and trust for both customers and developers engaged in scrum agile distributed software development (SADSD).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Comparative Study
    越来越多的关注围绕着社交媒体平台对公众讨论1-4的影响及其对社会动态5-9的影响,特别是在毒理学10-12的背景下。这里,为了更好地理解这些现象,我们使用一种比较的方法来分离跨多个社交媒体平台的人类行为模式。特别是,我们分析不同在线社区的对话,专注于识别有毒成分的一致模式。从一个广泛的数据集,跨越八个平台超过34年-从Usenet到当代社交媒体-我们的发现显示了一致的对话模式和用户行为,无论平台如何,主题或时间。值得注意的是,虽然长时间的谈话总是表现出更高的毒性,有毒的语言并不总是阻止人们参与对话,毒性不一定会随着讨论的发展而升级。我们的分析表明,用户之间的辩论和对比情绪大大有助于更激烈和敌对的讨论。此外,这些模式持续了三十年,尽管平台和社会规范发生了变化,强调了人类行为在塑造在线话语中的关键作用。
    Growing concern surrounds the impact of social media platforms on public discourse1-4 and their influence on social dynamics5-9, especially in the context of toxicity10-12. Here, to better understand these phenomena, we use a comparative approach to isolate human behavioural patterns across multiple social media platforms. In particular, we analyse conversations in different online communities, focusing on identifying consistent patterns of toxic content. Drawing from an extensive dataset that spans eight platforms over 34 years-from Usenet to contemporary social media-our findings show consistent conversation patterns and user behaviour, irrespective of the platform, topic or time. Notably, although long conversations consistently exhibit higher toxicity, toxic language does not invariably discourage people from participating in a conversation, and toxicity does not necessarily escalate as discussions evolve. Our analysis suggests that debates and contrasting sentiments among users significantly contribute to more intense and hostile discussions. Moreover, the persistence of these patterns across three decades, despite changes in platforms and societal norms, underscores the pivotal role of human behaviour in shaping online discourse.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号