Suppr超能文献

确定优先事项。

Choosing priorities.

作者信息

Gray J A

出版信息

J Med Ethics. 1979 Jun;5(2):73-5. doi: 10.1136/jme.5.2.73.

Abstract

Dr Gray leaves us with a question at the conclusion of his article--how should we choose priorities? He says that the debate so far has been mainly on what we should choose, but perhaps we should consider how to choose even more. Under the various subheadings of Criteria, Principles and Persons Dr Gray sets out the pros and cons of the arguments in the priority debates and tries to offer some more specific guidelines to offset the criticism that the government's priority discussions have been too generalised. Yet this is a difficult task when everyone's priorities are so different.

摘要

格雷博士在其文章结尾给我们留下了一个问题——我们应如何选择优先事项?他表示,到目前为止的辩论主要集中在我们应该选择什么上,但或许我们更应考虑如何进行选择。在“标准”“原则”和“人员”等不同小标题下,格雷博士阐述了优先事项辩论中各种论点的利弊,并试图提供一些更具体的指导方针,以回应有关政府优先事项讨论过于笼统的批评。然而,当每个人的优先事项差异如此之大时,这是一项艰巨的任务。

相似文献

1
Choosing priorities.确定优先事项。
J Med Ethics. 1979 Jun;5(2):73-5. doi: 10.1136/jme.5.2.73.
4
Cost-benefit analysis and medical ethics.成本效益分析与医学伦理
J Med Ethics. 1980 Dec;6(4):177-9. doi: 10.1136/jme.6.4.177.
5
Efficiency and health.效率与健康。
Nurs Ethics. 1997 May;4(3):181-90. doi: 10.1177/096973309700400302.
7
The 'no lose' philosophy in medicine.医学中的“无损失”理念。
J Med Ethics. 1978 Jun;4(2):61-3. doi: 10.1136/jme.4.2.61.
8
Choosing between cancer patients.在癌症患者之间进行选择。
J Med Ethics. 1990 Jun;16(2):71-4. doi: 10.1136/jme.16.2.71.

引用本文的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验