Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33000012›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open2020

Mandatory and permissive reporting laws: obligations, challenges, moral dilemmas, and opportunities.

Joel M Geiderman, Catherine A Marco

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Criminality in Huntington Disease.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2022
    Article
  12. Mandatory and permissive reporting laws: obligations, challenges, moral dilemmas, and opportunities.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2020
    Article
  13. 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

2 authors.

Joel M GeidermanRuth and Harry Roman Emergency Department Department of Emergency Medicine and Center for Healthcare Ethics Burns and Allen Research Institute Cedars-Sinai Medical Center Los Angeles California USA.
Catherine A MarcoDepartment of Emergency Medicine Wright State University Boonshoft School of Medicine Dayton Ohio USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6115-1174

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The duty to report certain conditions to public health or law enforcement authorities is one that falls on all physicians and other health care workers as part of their duty to protect the public from harm. In an open society, others, such as teachers, clergy, police officers, or simply neighbors, share the responsibility of protecting individuals at risk, often by reporting them to authorities. The emergency physician and others in the emergency department are uniquely positioned to identify people at risk or who pose a risk, and to report them as required or allowed under the law. In some circumstances, these duties may conflict with ethical duties such as respect for patient autonomy or to protect confidentiality. This article will examine mandatory and permissive reporting laws in various states from an ethical perspective. It will also explore emerging issues such as the reporting of suspected human trafficking.

Indexed as

ethicspublic healthreporting

Identifiers

PMID33000012
PMCPMC7493571

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.