ArticleTheoretical medicine and bioethics2018
Taking responsibility for health in an epistemically polluted environment.
Article in Theoretical medicine and bioethics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Conceptualising research environments using biological niche concepts.European journal for philosophy of science · 2025Article
- Rationing, Responsibility, and Vaccination during COVID-19: A Conceptual Map.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2024Article
- Refund: a defense of luck egalitarian policy in healthcare.Theoretical medicine and bioethics · 2024Article
- Responsibility and the recursion problem.Ratio · 2022Article
- Article
- In Trust We Trust: Epistemic Vigilance and Responsibility.Social epistemology · 2022Article
- 'Personal Health Surveillance': The Use of mHealth in Healthcare Responsibilisation.Public health ethics · 2021Article
- Neonatology in Austria: ethics to improve practice.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Proposals for regulating or nudging healthy choices are controversial. Opponents often argue that individuals should take responsibility for their own health, rather than be paternalistically manipulated for their own good. In this paper, I argue that people can take responsibility for their own health only if they satisfy certain epistemic conditions, but we live in an epistemic environment in which these conditions are not satisfied. Satisfying the epistemic conditions for taking responsibility, I argue, requires regulation of this environment. I describe some proposals for such regulation and show that we cannot reject all regulation in the name of individual responsibility. We must either regulate individuals' healthy choices or regulate the epistemic environment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.