Duty to Recontact
Duty to Warn
DNA databanks and consent: a suggested policy option involving an authorization model. (1/10)
BACKGROUND: Genetic databases are becoming increasingly common as a means of determining the relationship between lifestyle, environmental exposures and genetic diseases. These databases rely on large numbers of research subjects contributing their genetic material to successfully explore the genetic basis of disease. However, as all possible research questions that can be posed of the data are unknown, an unresolved ethical issue is the status of informed consent for future research uses of genetic material. DISCUSSION: In this paper, we discuss the difficulties of an informed consent model for future ineffable uses of genetic data. We argue that variations on consent, such as presumed consent, blanket consent or constructed consent fail to meet the standards required by current informed consent doctrine and are distortions of the original concept. In this paper, we propose the concept of an authorization model whereby participants in genetic data banks are able to exercise a certain amount of control over future uses of genetic data. We argue this preserves the autonomy of individuals at the same time as allowing them to give permission and discretion to researchers for certain types of research. SUMMARY: The authorization model represents a step forward in the debate about informed consent in genetic databases. The move towards an authorization model would require changes in the regulatory and legislative environments. Additionally, empirical support of the utility and acceptability of authorization is required. (+info)The duty to follow up. (2/10)
Case histories are based on actual medical negligence claims, however certain facts have been omitted or changed by the author to ensure the anonymity of the parties involved. Many general practitioners are concerned that the law places all of the responsibility for follow up on to the GP and ask: 'What is the patient's responsibility'? This article explores the duty of GPs and patients to follow up tests and results. (+info)The emergence of an ethical duty to disclose genetic research results: international perspectives. (3/10)
The last decade has witnessed the emergence of international ethics guidelines discussing the importance of disclosing global and also, in certain circumstances, individual genetic research results to participants. This discussion is all the more important considering the advent of pharmacogenomics and the increasing incidence of 'translational' genetic research in the post-genomic era. We surveyed both the literature and the ethical guidelines using selective keywords. We then analyzed our data using a qualitative method approach and singled out countries or policies that were representative of certain positions. From our findings, we conclude that at the international level, there now exists an ethical duty to return individual genetic research results subject to the existence of proof of validity, significance and benefit. Even where these criteria are met, the right of the research participant not to know also has to be taken into consideration. The existence of an ethical duty to return individual genetic research results begs several other questions: Who should have the responsibility of disclosing such results and when? To whom should the results be disclosed? How? Finally, will this ethical 'imperative' become a legally recognized duty as well? (+info)A patient's duty to follow up. (4/10)
The allegations of negligence against Congress were that there was a failure to follow up the patient's diagnosis and treatment and, in particular, a failure to follow up the recommended cholesterol test and failure to follow up the referral by Dr Boffa to a specialist physician for assessment of suspected ischaemic heart disease. The allegations against Dr Boffa were that he was negligent in failing to properly diagnose and/or treat the patient on 2 March 2000 and in then failing to follow up on the patient's suspected ischaemic heart disease. (+info)Changing perspectives in biobank research: from individual rights to concerns about public health regarding the return of results. (5/10)
(+info)Research participants' perspectives on genotype-driven research recruitment. (6/10)
(+info)The duty of GPs to follow up patients. (7/10)
A recent Supreme Court of Victoria judgement examined the legal obligations of a general practitioner to recall a patient who does not undergo a test that has been recommended by the GP or to return for a consultation, despite being asked to do so. (+info)Notifying patients exposed to blood products associated with Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease: integrating science, legal duties and ethical mandates. (8/10)
The issue of notifying people who have been exposed to blood products that have been associated with Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) has arisen at a time when the Canadian blood system is under intense scrutiny. As a result, the Canadian Red Cross Society issued a recommendation to health care institutions that recipients of CJD-associated blood products be identified, notified and counselled. Although Canadian jurisprudence in the realm of informed consent may support a policy of individual notification, a review of the scientific evidence and the applicable ethical principles arguably favours a policy of a more general public notification. Indeed, situations such as this require a unique approach to the formation of legal and ethical duties, one that effectively integrates all relevant factors. As such, the authors argue that individual notification is currently not justified. Nevertheless, if a system of general notification is implemented (e.g., through a series of public health announcements), it should provide, for people who wish to know, the opportunity to find out whether they were given CJD-associated products. (+info)The "duty to recontact" is not a formal medical term, but rather a concept that refers to the ethical obligation of healthcare providers to inform and follow up with their patients if new information becomes available that may affect their previous medical diagnoses or treatments. This duty arises from the principle of respect for autonomy, which requires healthcare providers to involve their patients in decision-making about their care based on complete and accurate information.
In some cases, new research or clinical guidelines may emerge that call into question a previous diagnosis or treatment recommendation. In such situations, healthcare providers may have a duty to recontact their patients to inform them of the new information and discuss any necessary changes to their care plan. The specifics of this duty may vary depending on factors such as the significance of the new information, the potential risks and benefits of different treatment options, and the patient's individual circumstances and preferences. Ultimately, the goal of the duty to recontact is to ensure that patients receive the best possible care based on current medical knowledge and standards.
The "duty to warn" is a legal and ethical obligation that healthcare professionals have to inform their patients or others who may be at risk of harm from the actions or behaviors of their patient. This duty arises from the principle of non-maleficence, which requires doctors to avoid causing harm to their patients.
In the context of medical practice, the duty to warn typically applies when a patient has a mental illness or condition that makes them a danger to themselves or others. For example, if a psychiatrist determines that their patient poses a serious threat of violence to a specific individual, they may have a legal and ethical obligation to warn that person or take other steps to protect them from harm.
The specifics of the duty to warn can vary depending on the jurisdiction and the circumstances involved. In some cases, healthcare professionals may be required to report certain types of threats or behaviors to law enforcement authorities. Ultimately, the goal of the duty to warn is to prevent harm and promote the safety and well-being of patients and others who may be at risk.
Private duty nursing is a type of nursing care provided in a home or other residential setting to an individual who requires more intensive or complex medical care than can be provided through traditional home health services. This type of care is usually provided by a registered nurse (RN) or licensed practical nurse (LPN) and is tailored to meet the specific needs of the patient. The services may include direct patient care, such as administering medications, monitoring vital signs, wound care, and managing medical equipment, as well as education and support for the patient and their family members. Private duty nursing is often utilized when a patient is recovering from surgery, has a chronic illness or disability, or requires end-of-life care. It is usually paid for out-of-pocket or through long-term care insurance.
List of MeSH codes (F01)
Wesley Crusher
List of MeSH codes (I01)
List of MeSH codes (N03)
Last battle of Bismarck
List of Burn Notice characters
1979 Dniprodzerzhynsk mid-air collision
George Roupell
Music of The X-Files
NOAA-B
Baker Street robbery
Darkover
American white ibis
Ares I-X
Françoise Hardy
Emergency medical services in the United Kingdom
Duty to Recontact | Profiles RNS
Good Laboratory Practices for Molecular Genetic Testing for Heritable Diseases and Conditions
The 'thousand-dollar genome': an ethical exploration | European Journal of Human Genetics
MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Chief Judge Karon O Bowdre on 8/26/15 for Morris v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner :...
Recontacting Pediatric Research Participants for Consent When They Reach the Age of Majority - The Hastings Center
List of MeSH codes (F01) - Wikipedia
MEMORANDUM OPINION for Powell v. Astrue(CONSENT) :: Justia Dockets & Filings
Applied Ethics, Lincoln Center for - Fingerprint - Arizona State University
Research. Medical search. Articles
Estate Planning in Virginia (OLD EDITION)
7:30 pm
Purchase Articles Archives - Page 5 of 9 - Canadian Health Policy
Secondary Use of Patient Tissue in Cancer Biobanks<...
Genetic counseling: preconception, prenatal, perinatal | HSTalks
Checkout - Canadian Health Policy
MeSH Browser
Legal Services | Profiles RNS
IJERPH | Free Full-Text | How Do Price Minimizing Behaviors Impact Smoking Cessation? Findings from the International Tobacco...
MESH TREE NUMBER CHANGES - 2013 MeSH. August 27, 2012
MESH TREE NUMBER CHANGES - 2013 MeSH. August 27, 2012
MESH TREE NUMBER CHANGES - 2013 MeSH. August 27, 2012
MESH TREE NUMBER CHANGES - 2013 MeSH. August 27, 2012
MESH TREE NUMBER CHANGES - 2013 MeSH. August 27, 2012
MESH TREE NUMBER CHANGES - 2013 MeSH. August 27, 2012
MESH TREE NUMBER CHANGES - 2013 MeSH. August 27, 2012
MESH TREE NUMBER CHANGES - 2013 MeSH. August 27, 2012
DeCS
The Night Is Coming: Plan to Sequence the Genome of Millions Gets Boost from Obama Administration - Are They Looking for...
Researchers2
- Using three different contexts (longitudinal studies, clinical trials, and newborn screening), we argue that distinctions should be made between the risks and benefits involved in recontacting for consent before determining the potential duties of researchers. (thehastingscenter.org)
- For studies using previously collected tissues, researchers should attempt recontact and reconsent for research aims or methods beyond the scope of the original consent. (johnshopkins.edu)
Participants1
- This paper explores the issue of whether, to satisfy the ethical and legal norms of consent for research, participants in pediatric studies who attain the age of majority after their parents or guardians enrolled them in a study should be "recontacted" to obtain their consent to remain in the study. (thehastingscenter.org)
Research6
- An obligation to recontact should always be balanced with the feasibility and cost of such efforts in each particular research context and with consideration for the existence or lack of an ongoing relationship with the participant. (thehastingscenter.org)
- The term "duty to recontact" refers to the possible ethical and/or legal obligation of genetics service providers (GSPs) to recontact former patients about advances in research that might be relevant to them. (lookformedical.com)
- There also was a lack of consensus about the possible benefits and burdens of recontacting patients and about various alternative methods of informing patients about research advances. (lookformedical.com)
- Many favor allowing research beyond the scope of the original consent to proceed if recontact is impossible. (johnshopkins.edu)
- Implications exist for current multidisciplinary care of wounded active duty and veteran service members, and future research should determine whether multimorbidity denotes distinct post-blast injury syndromes. (biomedcentral.com)
- The workshop discussed the scope of the duty and standard of care arising in research and in clinical care, and the impact that introducing WGS and WES might have. (phgfoundation.org)
Benefits1
- However, in the absence of broad initial consent, when recontact is impossible, a case-by-case decision must be made regarding a proposal's potential benefits and harms. (johnshopkins.edu)
Officers2
- In November of 2006, Para-Ordnance unveiled its Carry 9 LDA, designed from the ground up for concealed carry by undercover or off-duty officers. (policemag.com)
- The agency's statewide span and numbers of officers on duty at any given hour makes them the largest on-duty, publically available law enforcement agency in the state. (officer.com)
Standard of c1
- Respondents were divided about whether recontacting patients should be the standard of care: 46% answered yes, 43% answered no, and 11% did not know. (lookformedical.com)
Consent1
- There was strong support for recontact and reconsent when possible and for the concept of broad consent at the time of tissue collection. (johnshopkins.edu)
Service1
- The duty to recontact: attitudes of genetics service providers. (lookformedical.com)
Data2
- Finally: can a doctor be expected to recontact the patient if new scientific knowledge means that data obtained from past WGA may be viewed in a new light? (nature.com)
- Analysis of qualitative data suggested that most respondents consider recontacting patients an ethically desirable, but not feasible, goal. (lookformedical.com)
Previously1
- The flight under investigation was the third of the flight crew's shared duty period - they had previously flown a London Stansted - Turin rotation. (skybrary.aero)
Call2
- I have t tops on my download free cheats call of duty modern warfare 2 and the wife has a sunroof in the and there is no comparison between the two, t tops are much better IMO. (tougen-corp.jp)
- Again, thanks again for setting everything up and going above and beyond the call of duty. (ringthepines.com)
Reinterpretation2
- The Responsibility to Recontact Research Participants after Reinterpretation of Genetic and Genomic Research Results. (nih.gov)
- Any laboratory policy to actively reinterpret (specific sets of) classifications will confront the clinician with the question whether the person tested should be recontacted on a reinterpretation of previously reported results. (bmj.com)
Genetic3
- Duty to Recontact" addresses providers' obligations to patients who have undergone previous genetic testing, given the growing complexities of genetic/genomic medicine and the potential for new findings in old tests. (mayoclinic.org)
- When and how patients should be recontacted after new genetic information becomes available has been investigated extensively. (biomedcentral.com)
- As others have pointed out, recontacting in general comes with challenges, since patients may not want to be recontacted or have forgotten about their genetic test. (bmj.com)
Responsibilities1
- 1 They place these duties with laboratories, acknowledging that they are setting aside any responsibilities that might arise for clinicians. (bmj.com)
Data1
- An interim assessment 1½ years after the baseline examination would do double duty as an opportunity to collect valuable supplemental data and as an opportunity to test our ability to trace the baseline sample for follow-up. (nih.gov)
Specific1
- While Gabriel Watts and Ainsley Newson argue that diagnostic laboratories do not have a general duty to routinely reinterpret genomic variant classifications, they do formulate several restricted duties to actively reinterpret specific types of classifications. (bmj.com)
Public1
- The relevant public tasks are section 149 (public sector equality duty) and section 1 (the fairer Scotland duty) of the Equality Act 2010. (gov.scot)
Legal1
- Obligación ética y/o legal de cualquier investigador o proveedor de servicios sanitarios, de comunicar con antiguos pacientes o individuos objeto de una investigación, en cuanto a los avances en materia de tratamiento u otras pruebas diagnósticas efectuadas con anterioridad, o sobre nuevas propuestas de utilización de muestras de sangre o de tejidos obtenidas en el pasado para otros fines. (bvsalud.org)