• 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

基于预先请求评估公众对痴呆患者安乐死和协助自杀的态度:美国公众的实验性调查。

Assessing Public's Attitudes Towards Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide of Persons With Dementia Based on Their Advance Request: An Experimental Survey of US Public.

机构信息

Department of Bioethics (DRM, TB, SYK), Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.

Biostatistics and Clinical Epidemiology Service (PW), Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.

出版信息

Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2021 Apr;29(4):384-394. doi: 10.1016/j.jagp.2020.07.013. Epub 2020 Jul 30.

DOI:10.1016/j.jagp.2020.07.013
PMID:32807627
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7854974/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Advance request euthanasia and/or assisted suicide (AR-EAS) in persons with dementia is highly controversial. Results of typical public opinion surveys may not reflect the ethical and practical issues involved in the practice. We tested the impact of incorporating such issues in the assessment of public attitudes toward legalization of AR-EAS.

DESIGN

Online survey (April 27-30, 2020) of 1,711 adults recruited via CloudResearch PrimePanel, matched to U.S. population in age, sex, race and/or ethnicity, education, household income, and political affiliation. After assessing initial attitudes toward legalization of AR-EAS, respondents viewed one of six randomly assigned scenarios depicting an ethical or practical issue in AR-EAS; acceptability of EAS in each scenario as well as general attitudes toward AR-EAS legalization were then elicited.

RESULTS

Approximately 54.4% initially agreed/strongly agreed with AR-EAS legalization; agreement was associated with lower dementia quality-of-life rating, younger age, not being religious, liberal politics, and $75,000-$99,999 income range. After viewing the scenarios, a minority in each scenario arm found the AR-EAS depicted acceptable (20.7%-39.1%; p<0.0001 for all six arms, in comparison with initial legalization question response). Support (agree/strongly agree) for AR-EAS legalization after reading specific scenarios was generally lower (range 36.5%-49.3%; p≤0.0002); change in support for legalization was associated with initial support for legalization, acceptability of AR-EAS in the scenarios, dementia quality-of-life ratings, and race.

CONCLUSION

Informing the public of the ethical and practical complexities in AR-EAS may have significant effects on their attitudes toward legalization. Future surveys should ensure that the public's views reflect sufficient exposure to these complexities.

摘要

目的

在痴呆症患者中提前提出安乐死和/或协助自杀(AR-EAS)的请求是极具争议的。典型的公众意见调查结果可能无法反映实践中涉及的伦理和实际问题。我们检验了在评估公众对 AR-EAS 合法化的态度时纳入这些问题的影响。

设计

通过 CloudResearch PrimePanel 招募了 1711 名成年人进行在线调查(2020 年 4 月 27 日至 30 日),这些成年人在年龄、性别、种族和/或民族、教育程度、家庭收入和政治派别方面与美国人口相匹配。在评估了 AR-EAS 合法化的初步态度后,受访者查看了六个随机分配的场景中的一个,这些场景描绘了 AR-EAS 中的一个伦理或实际问题;然后评估了每个场景中的 EAS 的可接受性以及对 AR-EAS 合法化的总体态度。

结果

约 54.4%的人最初同意/强烈同意 AR-EAS 合法化;同意与较低的痴呆症生活质量评分、较年轻的年龄、不信教、自由政治以及 75000-99999 美元的收入范围相关。在观看了场景后,每个场景组中的少数人发现所描述的 AR-EAS 是可接受的(20.7%-39.1%;与最初的法律化问题回答相比,所有六个场景组均为 p<0.0001)。阅读特定场景后,对 AR-EAS 合法化的支持(同意/强烈同意)通常较低(范围为 36.5%-49.3%;p≤0.0002);对合法化的支持的变化与最初对合法化的支持、对场景中 AR-EAS 的可接受性、痴呆症生活质量评分和种族有关。

结论

告知公众 AR-EAS 中的伦理和实际复杂性可能会对他们对合法化的态度产生重大影响。未来的调查应确保公众的观点反映出对这些复杂性的充分了解。

相似文献

1
Assessing Public's Attitudes Towards Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide of Persons With Dementia Based on Their Advance Request: An Experimental Survey of US Public.基于预先请求评估公众对痴呆患者安乐死和协助自杀的态度:美国公众的实验性调查。
Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2021 Apr;29(4):384-394. doi: 10.1016/j.jagp.2020.07.013. Epub 2020 Jul 30.
2
Attitudes toward the Legalization of Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide in South Korea: A Cross-Sectional Survey.韩国对安乐死或医师协助自杀合法化的态度:一项横断面调查。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Apr 24;19(9):5183. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19095183.
3
Resource Limitation and "Forced Irremediability" in Physician-Assisted Deaths for Nonterminal Mental and Physical Conditions: A Survey of the US Public.资源限制和非终末期精神和身体状况下的医生协助死亡中的“强制不可挽回性”:对美国公众的调查。
J Acad Consult Liaison Psychiatry. 2022 Jul-Aug;63(4):302-313. doi: 10.1016/j.jaclp.2021.12.010. Epub 2022 Jan 10.
4
Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide of Persons With Dementia in the Netherlands.荷兰痴呆症患者的安乐死和协助自杀。
Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2020 Apr;28(4):466-477. doi: 10.1016/j.jagp.2019.08.015. Epub 2019 Aug 22.
5
Complexities in consultations in case of euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide: a survey among SCEN physicians.在安乐死或医师协助自杀情况下的咨询的复杂性:SCEN 医师的调查。
BMC Fam Pract. 2020 Jan 9;21(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s12875-019-1063-z.
6
Public and physicians' support for euthanasia in people suffering from psychiatric disorders: a cross-sectional survey study.公众和医生对患有精神疾病者安乐死的支持情况:一项横断面调查研究。
BMC Med Ethics. 2019 Sep 11;20(1):62. doi: 10.1186/s12910-019-0404-8.
7
Attitudes and Practices of Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide in the United States, Canada, and Europe.美国、加拿大和欧洲的安乐死和医师协助自杀态度和实践。
JAMA. 2016 Jul 5;316(1):79-90. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.8499.
8
Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide: a comparative survey of physicians, terminally ill cancer patients, and the general population.安乐死与医生协助自杀:对医生、晚期癌症患者及普通人群的比较调查。
J Clin Oncol. 1997 Feb;15(2):418-27. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1997.15.2.418.
9
Attitudes of Michigan physicians and the public toward legalizing physician-assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia.密歇根州医生和公众对医生协助自杀合法化及自愿安乐死的态度。
N Engl J Med. 1996 Feb 1;334(5):303-9. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199602013340506.
10
Modern bioethical issues: Euthanasia, physician assisted suicide and abortion. Comparative study of attitudes between physicians and law professionals.现代生物伦理问题:安乐死、医生协助自杀与堕胎。医生与法律专业人士态度的比较研究。
Psychiatriki. 2022 Mar 28;33(1):49-55. doi: 10.22365/jpsych.2021.043. Epub 2021 Nov 26.

引用本文的文献

1
Cross-sectional survey on public attitudes and factors related to physician-assisted dying in Taiwan.台湾地区公众对医师协助自杀的态度及相关因素的横断面调查。
BMJ Open. 2025 Jan 15;15(1):e089388. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-089388.
2
Older adults' attitudes toward using Euthanasia at the end-of life: cancer vs. Parkinson's disease.老年人对临终使用安乐死的态度:癌症与帕金森病。
Front Public Health. 2024 Jun 14;12:1393535. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1393535. eCollection 2024.
3
Debating Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Death in People with Psychiatric Disorders.论精神障碍患者的安乐死和医师协助自杀。
Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2022 Jun;24(6):325-335. doi: 10.1007/s11920-022-01339-y. Epub 2022 Jun 9.
4
Attitudes toward the Legalization of Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide in South Korea: A Cross-Sectional Survey.韩国对安乐死或医师协助自杀合法化的态度:一项横断面调查。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Apr 24;19(9):5183. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19095183.
5
Resource Limitation and "Forced Irremediability" in Physician-Assisted Deaths for Nonterminal Mental and Physical Conditions: A Survey of the US Public.资源限制和非终末期精神和身体状况下的医生协助死亡中的“强制不可挽回性”:对美国公众的调查。
J Acad Consult Liaison Psychiatry. 2022 Jul-Aug;63(4):302-313. doi: 10.1016/j.jaclp.2021.12.010. Epub 2022 Jan 10.
6
Physician-Assisted Suicide in Dementia: Paradoxes, Pitfalls and the Need for Prudence.痴呆症中的医生协助自杀:悖论、陷阱与审慎之需
Front Sociol. 2021 Dec 22;6:815233. doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2021.815233. eCollection 2021.

本文引用的文献

1
Advance euthanasia directives and the Dutch prosecution.预先安乐死指令与荷兰检察机关
J Med Ethics. 2020 Apr 6. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106131.
2
Food Agency in the United States: Associations with Cooking Behavior and Dietary Intake.美国食品机构:与烹饪行为和饮食摄入的关联。
Nutrients. 2020 Mar 24;12(3):877. doi: 10.3390/nu12030877.
3
First prosecution of a Dutch doctor since the Euthanasia Act of 2002: what does the verdict mean?2002 年安乐死法案通过以来首位荷兰医生被起诉:判决意味着什么?
J Med Ethics. 2020 Feb;46(2):71-75. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2019-105877. Epub 2019 Dec 5.
4
Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide of Persons With Dementia in the Netherlands.荷兰痴呆症患者的安乐死和协助自杀。
Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2020 Apr;28(4):466-477. doi: 10.1016/j.jagp.2019.08.015. Epub 2019 Aug 22.
5
Online panels in social science research: Expanding sampling methods beyond Mechanical Turk.在线panel 调查在社会科学研究中的运用:超越 Mechanical Turk 的抽样方法。
Behav Res Methods. 2019 Oct;51(5):2022-2038. doi: 10.3758/s13428-019-01273-7.
6
Opinion cascades and the unpredictability of partisan polarization.意见传递与党派极化的不可预测性。
Sci Adv. 2019 Aug 28;5(8):eaax0754. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aax0754. eCollection 2019 Aug.
7
Comparing the attitudes of four groups of stakeholders from Quebec, Canada, toward extending medical aid in dying to incompetent patients with dementia.比较加拿大魁北克省四组利益相关者对将医疗辅助自杀扩大到痴呆症无行为能力患者的态度。
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2019 Jul;34(7):1078-1086. doi: 10.1002/gps.5111. Epub 2019 Apr 29.
8
Attitudes Toward Physician-Assisted Death From Individuals Who Learn They Have an Alzheimer Disease Biomarker.得知自己有阿尔茨海默病生物标志物的个体对医生协助死亡的态度。
JAMA Neurol. 2019 Jul 1;76(7):864-866. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.0797.
9
Systems thinking as a pathway to global warming beliefs and attitudes through an ecological worldview.系统思维作为一种途径,通过生态世界观来影响人们对全球变暖的信仰和态度。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019 Apr 23;116(17):8214-8219. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1819310116. Epub 2019 Apr 8.
10
Advance euthanasia directives: a controversial case and its ethical implications.提前安乐死指令:一个有争议的案例及其伦理含义。
J Med Ethics. 2019 Feb;45(2):84-89. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2017-104644. Epub 2018 Mar 3.