Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40927616›Full record

ArticleJournal of healthcare, science and the humanities

COVID-19 and the moral failure to protect the most vulnerable.

Dennis R Cooley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of healthcare, science and the humanities. 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

1 author.

Dennis R CooleyDirector, Northern Plains Ethics Institute, Editor, Springer's International Library of Bioethics, Professor of Philosophy and Ethics, History, Philosophy, and Religious Studies-Dept. 2340, Minard Hall 422J, P.O Box 6050, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58108, [701] 231-7038, Email: dennis.cooley@ndsu.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The USA's COVID-19 pandemic experience is an example of privileged thinking that what generally works for those in power ought to be the standard for what makes medical interventions, research, treatments, and policy ethical. As a result of not focusing on doing whatever was required for vulnerable or susceptible populations or their members to achieve their health and flourishing, there are a disproportionate numbers of COVID-19 infections and deaths in Black, Hispanic, and indigenous communities. Future studies will likely show even more harm and larger health failure than known of now. Instead of using the language of privilege and power in their thinking, public health organizations should focus far more on the language of diversity and meaningful inclusion. If we truly are interested in the vulnerable and susceptible communities flourishing as individuals and populations within our society, as well as the society's flourishing, then those terms have to be defined in the language of the vulnerable and susceptible. It is only by using this approach that we can make pragmatic plans that work to the advantage of those who are vulnerable or susceptible.

Indexed as

COVID-19minority communitiesprivilegesusceptiblevulnerable

Identifiers

PMID40927616
PMCPMC12416242

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.