Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36187410›Full record

ReviewThe Yale journal of biology and medicine2022

The Ethical Relevance of "Alternatives" in Health Care Priority Setting - The Case of Preexposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) of HIV.

Erik Gustavsson, Joar Björk

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Yale journal of biology and medicine, 2022. 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

2 authors.

Erik GustavssonDivision of Philosophy and Applied Ethics, Department of Culture and Society, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Joar BjörkStockholm Centre for Healthcare Ethics (CHE), LIME, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Preexposure prophylaxis for HIV is a drug that reduces the risk for an HIV-negative person to acquire HIV if taken prior to sex. It has been suggested that it is important for resource allocation decisions that there are alternatives (such as abstinence, masturbation, etc.) for individuals potentially benefitted by this prophylaxis. In this paper we explore this idea from an ethical perspective in relation to three notions often discussed in priority setting ethics, namely responsibility, outcomes, and severity of disease. While the relevance of alternatives may be explained in terms by responsibility-sensitive priority setting, such a view comes with several challenges. We then discuss two other ways in which this intuition could be better explained: (a) in terms of total outcome of health, and (b) in terms of severity of the condition.

Indexed as

Anti-HIV AgentsHIV InfectionsPre-Exposure ProphylaxisDelivery of Health CareHumansMoralsAnti-HIV AgentsAlternativesEthicsHIVPrEPPriority setting

Identifiers

PMID36187410
PMCPMC9511950

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.