Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42319686›Full record

ArticleIrish journal of medical science2026

Neglect of focus on income and private practice in ethics textbooks.

Claire Casey, Finnian King, Desmond O Neill

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2026. 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

3 authors.

Claire CaseyCentre for Ageing, Neurosciences and the Humanities, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Finnian KingCentre for Ageing, Neurosciences and the Humanities, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Desmond O NeillCentre for Ageing, Neurosciences and the Humanities, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. doneill@tcd.ie.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5542-9897

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionLearning about conflicts of interest should be one of the core aspects aspect of clinical ethics in undergraduate and postgraduate training. However, the focus may direct more to external factors such as ties with, or inducements from, pharmaceutical interests rather than inherent fallibilities and motives of practitioners. At first sight it would appear that there is very limited concentration on the impact of income or private versus public practice on clinical practice in ethics textbooks.

methodA list of clinical/medical ethics textbooks available on open shelves was established in the libraries of Trinity College Dublin, a deposit library alongside Oxford and Cambridge, each of which has rights to a copy of all publications originating in the British Isles. Two researchers independently established the presence and proportion of text relating to income or private practice in each textbook. In cases of disagreement, the senior author adjudicated. Descriptive statistics were used.

resultsOf 123 ethics textbooks examined, 304 out of 38,410 pages (mean 2.5 (0.89%), standard deviation 1.73, median 0) were dedicated to the issue of income and private practice.

conclusionsLeaders in clinical ethics should devote more emphasis to scrutiny and debate on the impact of income in addition to private and dual practice in education and research. There is significant opportunity to enhance such teaching by incorporating an informed approach to the wit and wisdom of the reflections on doctors and their income by Plautus, Molière and GB Shaw.

Indexed as

IncomePrivate PracticeTextbooks as TopicConflict of InterestHumansDual PracticeEthicsIatrocentric PositivismIncomePrivate PracticeTheatre

Identifiers

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.