Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33376107›Full record

ArticleClinical medicine (London, England)2021

Ethical principles and a practical approach to support policy making through the next phases of the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

Zoë Fritz, Julian L Huppert, Kathleen Liddell, Richard Holton, Jonathan P Fuld

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical medicine (London, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Zoë FritzThe Healthcare Improvement Studies (THIS) Institute, Cambridge, UK and Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK Zbmf2@cam.ac.uk.
Julian L HuppertJesus College, Cambridge; visiting professor in the Policy Institute, King's College London.
Kathleen LiddellMedicine and Life Sciences and reader in intellectual property and medical law, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Richard HoltonUniversity of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Jonathan P FuldCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is an urgent need for an ethical framework to help us address the local and national challenges that we face as clinicians during the COVID-19 pandemic. We propose four key commitments from which a practical and consistent ethical approach can be derived. These commitments are to articulate the needs, rights and interests of the different stakeholders affected by any policy; to be accountable and transparent, recognising that people are autonomous individuals with values and concerns of their own; to consider the impact of our actions on the sustainability of the NHS, infrastructure, service demands and staff welfare; and to treat everybody equitably, with all deserving of consideration and care. Implementing these commitments will require a number of specific actions. We must put in place frameworks enabling clear advocacy for each competing objective; communicate policy and practice effectively to the public; promote integration of decision-making among social, primary, secondary and tertiary care and reduce or stop unnecessary or inefficient interventions; minimise health inequalities; and build spare capacity into the system.In this article, we expand on these actions, and note the legal context in which this would be delivered.

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsPolicy MakingEthicsHumansSARS-CoV-2COVID-19Ethicslawpolicy

Identifiers

PMID33376107
PMCPMC8002807

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.