• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

起初是一种关系。

[In the beginning was a relationship].

作者信息

Vanbelle Guido

机构信息

Verbond Der Vlaamse Tandartsen, Weerstandsplein 7 1600 Sint-Pieters-Leeuw.

出版信息

Rev Belge Med Dent (1984). 2008;63(2):77-80.

PMID:18717455
Abstract

Judgment and actions based on scientific evidence are modified by the unique caregiver-patient relationship. Caregivers relying exclusively upon "rational" decisions in line with evidence-based clinical recommendations avoid their relational responsibility. The "noble" purpose illustrates that decisions to treat can be at the same time pointless and valuable. Dia (through) - logue (knowledge) makes it possible to go beyond informed consent, which holds caregivers responsible for providing information and patients for the decision to treat. Finally, where healing is no longer achievable and autonomy dies away, compassion rather than therapeutic tenacity might be the answer. These examples are explained corresponding to the philosophical ideas of respectively Emmanuel Levinas en Roger Burgraeve (noble purpose), Martin Buber (dialogical thinking) and Daniel C. Dennett (autonomy loss).

摘要

基于科学证据的判断和行动会因独特的医患关系而有所改变。仅仅依据符合循证临床建议的“理性”决策的护理人员逃避了他们的关系责任。“高尚”目的表明治疗决策可能同时毫无意义却又有价值。对话(dia,通过——logue,知识)使超越知情同意成为可能,知情同意认为护理人员有责任提供信息,而患者有责任做出治疗决定。最后,当治愈不再可行且自主性消失时,答案可能是同情而非治疗上的固执。这些例子分别对应埃马纽埃尔·列维纳斯和罗杰·布尔格拉埃夫(高尚目的)、马丁·布伯(对话思维)以及丹尼尔·C·丹尼特(自主性丧失)的哲学思想进行了解释。

相似文献

1
[In the beginning was a relationship].起初是一种关系。
Rev Belge Med Dent (1984). 2008;63(2):77-80.
2
[The origin of informed consent].[知情同意的起源]
Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2005 Oct;25(5):312-27.
3
[Patient autonomy and informed consent in clinical practice].[临床实践中的患者自主权与知情同意]
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2007 Jun 14;127(12):1644-7.
4
The evolving doctrine of informed consent for complementary and integrative therapy.补充与整合疗法中不断发展的知情同意原则。
Holist Nurs Pract. 2008 Jan-Feb;22(1):37-43. doi: 10.1097/01.HNP.0000306327.34085.b3.
5
Making responsible decisions. An interpretive ethic for genetic decisionmaking.做出负责任的决策。一种关于基因决策的解释性伦理。
Hastings Cent Rep. 1999 Jan-Feb;29(1):14-21.
6
An ethical approach to paternalism in the physician-patient relationship.医患关系中家长式作风的伦理方法。
Ethics Sci Med. 1977;4(3-4):135-8.
7
Whose body is it anyway? An updated model of healthcare decision-making rights for adolescents.这究竟是谁的身体?青少年医疗保健决策权的更新模式。
Cornell J Law Public Policy. 2005 Summer;14(2):251-325.
8
The doctor-patient relationship: communication, informed consent and the optometric patient.医患关系:沟通、知情同意与验光患者
J Am Optom Assoc. 1994 Jun;65(6):418-22.
9
Relational autonomy or undue pressure? Family's role in medical decision-making.关系自主性还是不当压力?家庭在医疗决策中的作用。
Scand J Caring Sci. 2008 Mar;22(1):128-35. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6712.2007.00561.x.
10
Is consent useful when resuscitation isn't?当复苏无效时,同意还有用吗?
Hastings Cent Rep. 1991 Nov-Dec;21(6):28-36.

引用本文的文献

1
Methodology for Online Reliability Studies: A Primer for Orthopedic Surgeons.在线可靠性研究方法:骨科医生入门指南。
Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2023;11(2):94-101. doi: 10.22038/ABJS.2022.44387.2214.