Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32537140›Full record

ReviewAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2020

Ethics for surgeons during the COVID-19 pandemic, review article.

Denis W Harkin

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. COVID-19 and medical professionalism in a pandemic.Postgraduate medical journal · 2021
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. My fear, my morals: a surgeon's perspective of the COVID crisis.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2020
    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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Denis W HarkinRoyal Victoria Hospital, Belfast Health & Social Care Trust, Northern Ireland, UK.
Belfast Health and Social Care Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Covid-19 pandemic is a devastating global healthcare emergency with seismic impact on how modern surgical services function. Surgeons worry, that whilst healthcare-resources are directed against the pandemic, double effect may predict these benevolent public health efforts will cause unintended maleficent effects through delays to surgical treatment. Surgeons will make many challenging ethical judgements during this pandemic, here we conduct a narrative review of how medical ethics may help us make the best available choices. A narrative review of all the relevant papers known to the author was conducted. We discuss the key aspects of medical ethics, and how they have applied to surgeons during the Covid-19 pandemic. The four fundamental principles of medical ethics include: Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy and Justice. Surgeons will face many decisions which shall challenge those ethical principles during the pandemic, and wisdom from medical ethics can guide surgeons, to do the right thing, make best available choices, and get the best available outcome for patients during the Covid-19 pandemic. The practice of surgery is distinguished by good judgement in the face of uncertainty, we must strive to do the right thing, advocate for our patients, and be honest in the face of uncertainty. Medical Ethics can guide us to make the best available choices for our patients during the Covid-19 pandemic, afterwards, we must emerge wiser having learnt lessons and rebuilding trust in surgical care.

Indexed as

Covid-19EthicsPandemicProfessionalismSurgeonsSurgery

Identifiers

PMID32537140
PMCPMC7278633
OpenAlexW3033552699

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.