Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40366910›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of medicine and philosophy2025

Justification and Limitations of the Duty to Treat.

Gustavo Ortiz-Millán

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of medicine and philosophy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Bioethics as bios ethikos.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2026
    Article
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

1 author.

Gustavo Ortiz-MillánInstituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City, Mexico.

Funding

PASPA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Do healthcare workers have a duty to treat contagious patients, even when it poses risks to their own health and lives during a pandemic? This article explores various justifications proposed in the literature to support such a duty. However, it contends that none of these provides a strong enough basis for establishing an absolute duty to treat-although it acknowledges that the bar of justification may be raised when working on more clear and explicit conditions in contracts and codes of ethics, among others. Furthermore, even if such a duty were acknowledged, it must be weighed against healthcare workers' other duties toward their families, co-workers, and personal well-being. Moreover, the duty to treat is argued to be contingent on the circumstances in which healthcare professionals operate, including access to adequate personal protective equipment provided by their institutions. It would have to be balanced against their right to safe working conditions. Within this context, the duty to treat is inherently tied to the preparedness of the State, healthcare systems, or institutions to effectively respond to emergencies.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelMoral ObligationsCodes of EthicsCOVID-19HumansPandemicsPersonal Protective Equipmentduty to planduty to treathealthcare workersmoral dilemmaspandemic

Identifiers

PMID40366910
PMCPMC12534082

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.