Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Autonomy, relationality, and brain-injured athletes: a critical examination of the Concussion in Sport Group’s Consensus Statements between 2001 and 2023.Francisco Javier Lopez Frias & Mike McNamee - 2024 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 18 (3):383-403.
    This article critically examines the development and consensus outputs of the Concussion in Sport Group. We examine the six Consensus Statements between 2001 and 2023 to explore the challenges that the presence of contextual forces pose to the development of effective and ethically justifiable medical guidelines to manage situations involving brain-injured athletes. First, we discuss the implicit and explicit ethical framework and goals underlining the statements. Secondly, drawing on a relational account of athlete choice, we expound on the limitations of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Can Open Science Advance Health Justice? Genomic Research Dissemination in the Evolving Data‐Sharing Landscape.Stephanie A. Kraft & Kathleen F. Mittendorf - 2024 - Hastings Center Report 54 (S2):73-83.
    Scientific data‐sharing and open science initiatives are increasingly important mechanisms for advancing the impact of genomic research. These mechanisms are being implemented as growing attention is paid to the need to improve the inclusion of research participants from marginalized and underrepresented groups. Together, these efforts aim to promote equitable advancements in genomic medicine. However, if not guided by community‐informed protections, these efforts may harm the very participants and communities they aim to benefit. This essay examines potential benefits and harms of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Navigating the Landscape of Digital Twins in Medicine: A Relational Bioethical Inquiry.Brandon Ferlito, Michiel De Proost & Seppe Segers - 2024 - Asian Bioethics Review 16 (3):471-481.
    This perspective article explores the use of digital twins (DTs) in medicine, highlighting its capacity to simulate risks and personalize treatments while examining the emerging bioethical concerns. Central concerns include power dynamics, exclusion, and misrepresentation. We propose adopting a relational bioethical approach that advocates for a comprehensive assessment of DTs in medicine, extending beyond individual interactions to consider broader structural relations and varying levels of access to power. This can be achieved through two key relational recommendations: acknowledging the impact of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark