ArticleAsian bioethics review2025
Displaying Moral Courage in Providing Discretionary Treatment in a Technologically Advanced, yet Resource-Limited Setting.
Article in Asian bioethics review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In our day-to-day clinical practice, we face several ethical dilemmas. Although we have a moral conscience, we are constrained by many factors in executing the right decision. It is in this context that courage to stand up for one's ethical values and make the right decision, even if we get penalized, is important. Four case scenarios from a large tertiary care hospital which provides care to patients belonging to all socioeconomic strata are described. The institution offers subsidized/free treatment to "deserving patients", and this subsidy is entirely decided upon by the treating medical team. With limited resources for subsidized treatment, we are often in a dilemma as to how much of financial support should be given and how to prioritize beneficiaries between those with acute illnesses versus those with chronic disabilities/cognitive impairment. With access to advanced investigations and treatment modalities, management individualized to patients becomes a daily challenge for the medical team. The ethical dilemma associated with these case scenarios and the moral courage shown by the decision makers in each case are discussed. Clinicians often rely on "phronesis"-the ethical decision-making grounded in an accumulated wisdom-when confronted with ethical dilemmas. The professional virtues such as compassion, discernment, empathy and integrity form an integral part of decision-making intertwined with the basic ethical principles of beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy and justice. Moral courage is often required to implement these virtues especially in the face of the opposing pragmatic realities of clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.