Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37938499›Full record

ReviewJournal of bioethical inquiry2024

Ethics and Health Security in the Australian COVID-19 Context: A Critical Interpretive Literature Review.

Anson Fehross, Kari Pahlman, Diego S Silva

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2024. 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
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anson FehrossSydney Health Ethics, University of Sydney, Edward Ford Building, A27 Fisher Rd, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Kari PahlmanSydney Health Ethics, University of Sydney, Edward Ford Building, A27 Fisher Rd, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Diego S SilvaSydney Health Ethics, University of Sydney, Edward Ford Building, A27 Fisher Rd, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia. diego.silva@sydney.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-8195-6404
The University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background The concept of "health security" is often used to motivate public health responses, yet the ethical values that underpin this concept remain largely unexamined. The recent Australian responses to COVID-19 serve as an important case study by which we can analyse the pre-existing literature to see what ethical values shaped, and continue to shape, Australia's response. Methods We conducted a critical interpretive literature review of academic and grey literatures within key databases, resulting in 2,220 sources. After screening for duplicates and relevance, we analysed ninety-six sources. Results First, risk and uncertainty are a leading focus, with a heavy concentration on risks to life and health. Second, free movement, safety, and security were recurringly emphasized, albeit narrowly focused upon the safety of the population. Third, legitimacy was a recurring theme, and it is here that discussions of "health security" figured highly. Conclusion Discussions of harm from government and associated official bodies fail to adequately distinguish between various senses of harm. Moreover, while the literature often discusses the balancing of rights, the steps involved in the weighing of these rights is rarely adequately explained and defended. We suggest that decision-makers should endeavour to clearly identify and defend the values undergirding their decisions in the public sphere.

Indexed as

COVID-19Public HealthSARS-CoV-2AustraliaHumansPandemicsGovernanceHarmPandemicSafetySecurityTransparency

Identifiers

PMID37938499
PMCPMC11052779
OpenAlexW4388499994

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.