ArticleAsian bioethics review2026
Should Malaysia Widen Patient Access to Medical Records? An Ethical Analysis.
Article in Asian bioethics review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Psychometric properties of the 11-item Trust in the Medical Profession scale (TIMP) Malay version.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper examines the ethical justification for wider patient access to their own medical records, focusing on utilitarian and deontological perspectives. At present, despite acknowledging that patients have rights to their medical records in Malaysia, this access is restricted. The utilitarian approach, rooted in consequentialist theory, advocates for actions that produce the greatest benefit for most people. It emphasises that patient access to medical records can enhance patient empowerment, engagement and overall health outcomes. Despite concerns from healthcare providers about potential patient confusion and misinterpretation, empirical studies indicate that patients generally benefit from access, feeling more in control and involved in their healthcare decisions. Conversely, Kant's deontological theory prioritises the morality of actions based on their inherent nature rather than outcomes. It supports unrestricted patient access as a moral obligation, emphasising respect for patient autonomy and truth-telling. According to this theory, withholding information from competent patients is ethically unjustifiable and infringes on their rights. Both ethical frameworks reveal significant patient benefits and challenge the traditional paternalistic approach of healthcare providers. This paper concludes that wider patient access to medical records in Malaysia is ethically justifiable and beneficial, urging legal and ethical reforms to support this 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.