Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37104661›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of bioethics : AJOB2024

Rationing, Responsibility, and Vaccination during COVID-19: A Conceptual Map.

Jin K Park, Ben Davies

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of bioethics : AJOB, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
11.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jin K ParkHarvard Medical School.
Ben DaviesUniversity of Oxford.ORCID 0000-0003-4612-7894
Harvard University · USUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, shortages of scarce healthcare resources consistently presented significant moral and practical challenges. While the importance of vaccines as a key pharmaceutical intervention to stem pandemic scarcity was widely publicized, a sizable proportion of the population chose not to vaccinate. In response, some have defended the use of vaccination status as a criterion for the allocation of scarce medical resources. In this paper, we critically interpret this burgeoning literature, and describe a framework for thinking about vaccine-sensitive resource allocation using the values of responsibility, reciprocity, and justice. Although our aim here is not to defend a single view of vaccine-sensitive resource allocation, we believe that attending critically with the diversity of arguments in favor (and against) vaccine-sensitivity reveals a number of questions that a vaccine-sensitive approach to allocation should answer in future pandemics.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesHealth Care RationingSARS-CoV-2VaccinationHumansPandemicsResource AllocationSocial JusticeSocial ResponsibilityCOVID-19 VaccinesCOVID-19pandemicspublic healthrationing/resource allocationreciprocityresponsibility for health

Identifiers

PMID37104661
PMCPMC11248994
OpenAlexW4367173532

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.