ArticleHEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues2020
A Pot Ignored Boils On: Sustained Calls for Explicit Consent of Intimate Medical Exams.
Article in HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- A New Layer of Informed Consent: Discussions and Documentation Regarding Sensitive Examinations in Surgery.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2022Article
- What is the clinical meaning of a negative bulbocavernosus reflex in spinal cord injury patients?Spinal cord series and cases · 2022Article
- Implementation and utilization of gynecological teaching associate and male urogenital teaching associate programs: a scoping review.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2021Article
- Current critiques of the WHO policy on female genital mutilation.International journal of impotence research · 2021Review
- Clinical and Organizational Ethics: Challenges to Methodology and Practice.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2020Article
- Introduction: Special Issue on Undergraduate Medical Education in Ethics and Professionalism.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unconsented intimate exams (UIEs) on men and women are known to occur for training purposes and diagnostic reasons, mostly during gynecological surgeries but also during prostate examinations and abdominal surgeries. UIEs most often occur on anesthetized patients but have also been reported on conscious patients. Over the last 30 years, several parties-both within and external to medicine-have increasingly voiced opposition to these exams. Arguments from medical associations, legal scholars, ethicists, nurses, and some physicians have not compelled meaningful institutional change. Opposition is escalating in the form of legislative bans and whistleblower reports. Aspiring to professional and scientific detachment, institutional consent policies make no distinction between intimate exams and exams on any other body part, but patients do not think of their intimate regions in a detached or neutral way and believe intimate exams call for special protections. UIEs are found to contribute to moral erosion and moral distress of medical students and compromise the sacred trust between the medical community and the general public. This paper refutes the main arguments in favor of the status quo, identifies a series of harms related to continuing the current practice, and proposes an explicit consent policy for intimate exams along with specific changes to medical school curriculum and institutional culture. Because patients are the rights-holders of their bodies, consent practices should reflect and uphold patient values which call for explicit consent for intimate exams.
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.