Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32303983›Full record

ArticleMedicine, health care, and philosophy2020

Defensive practice is indefensible: how defensive medicine runs counter to the ethical and professional obligations of clinicians.

Johan Christiaan Bester

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, health care, and philosophy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Defensive medicine in dermatological practice - Dermatopathology as a mirror of structural challenges.Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Paracetamol, pregnancy and law: What the Texas Tylenol case teaches SA doctors.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Policy Options for Reducing Defensive Medicine Behaviors: A Multi-Method Study.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Collateral Victims of Defensive Medical Practice.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  18. To find fault is easy, to find no-fault is fair.Future healthcare journal · 2023
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Johan Christiaan BesterUniversity of Nevada Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV, USA. jcbester@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Defensive medicine has become pervasive. Defensive medicine is often thought of as a systems issue, the inevitable result of an adversarial malpractice environment, with consequent focus on system-responses and tort reform. But defensive medicine also has ethical and professionalism implications that should be considered beyond the need for tort reform. This article examines defensive medicine from an ethics and professionalism perspective, showing how defensive medicine is deeply problematic. First, a definition of defensive medicine is offered that describes the essence of defensive practice: clinical actions with the goal of protecting the clinician against litigation or some adverse outcome. Ethical arguments against defensive medicine are considered: (1) defensive medicine is deceptive and undermines patient autonomy; (2) defensive medicine subjugates patient interests to physician interests and violate fiduciary obligations; (3) defensive medicine exposes patients to harm without benefit; (4) defensive medicine undermines trust in the profession; and (5) defensive medicine violates obligations of justice. Possible arguments in favor of defensive medicine are considered and refuted. Defensive practice is therefore unethical and unprofessional, and should be viewed as a challenge for medical ethics and professionalism.

Indexed as

Moral ObligationsProfessionalismDefensive MedicineHumansMalpracticeMedical OverusePersonal AutonomyPhilosophy, MedicalPhysician-Patient RelationsTrustClinical ethicsDefensive medicineFiduciary obligationsMedical ethicsProfessionalism

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.