Suppr超能文献

新冠疫情危机期间,同情心与伦理在应用行为分析服务获取决策中的作用:对考克斯、普拉夫尼克和布罗德黑德的回应

The Role of Compassion and Ethics in Decision Making Regarding Access to Applied Behavior Analysis Services During the COVID-19 Crisis: A Response to Cox, Plavnick, and Brodhead.

作者信息

LeBlanc Linda A, Lazo-Pearson Junelyn F, Pollard Joy S, Unumb Lorri S

机构信息

LeBlanc Behavioral Consulting, Golden, CO USA.

Advanced Behavioral Health, Costa Mesa, CA USA.

出版信息

Behav Anal Pract. 2020 Jun 16;13(3):604-608. doi: 10.1007/s40617-020-00446-7. eCollection 2020 Sep.

Abstract

Cox, Plavnick, and Brodhead (2020, "A Proposed Process for Risk Mitigation During the COVID-19 Pandemic") published a position statement in the emergency section of in response to the COVID-19 crisis. They argued against a blanket interpretation that in-person applied behavior analysis services for all patients should continue during the pandemic. They strongly argued that the risks of continued services are almost always prohibitive and that only in rare cases would the continuation of in-person services be warranted. Colombo, Wallace, and Taylor (2020, "An Essential Service Decisions Model for Applied Behavior Analytic Providers During Crisis") soon thereafter published a response to the article pointing out the potential dangers associated with the position of the article by Cox et al. They included a detailed decision model to assist providers in making nuanced and informed data-based decisions that provide the opportunity to honor the ethical responsibility for not abandoning patients. We echo the importance of the Colombo et al. response and add points of response centered on balanced ethical decision making informed by compassionate family-centered care.

摘要

考克斯、普拉夫尼克和布罗德黑德(2020年,《新冠疫情期间减轻风险的提议流程》)针对新冠疫情危机,在《[期刊名称未给出]》的紧急情况板块发表了一份立场声明。他们反对一概而论的解读,即认为在疫情期间应为所有患者持续提供面对面的应用行为分析服务。他们强烈认为,持续提供服务的风险几乎总是过高,只有在极少数情况下,继续提供面对面服务才是合理的。此后不久,科伦坡、华莱士和泰勒(2020年,《危机期间应用行为分析服务提供者的基本服务决策模型》)发表了对该文章的回应,指出考克斯等人文章立场相关的潜在危险。他们包含了一个详细的决策模型,以协助服务提供者做出细致入微且基于数据的明智决策,从而有机会履行不抛弃患者的道德责任。我们认同科伦坡等人回应的重要性,并补充了以富有同情心的家庭中心护理为依据的平衡道德决策为核心的回应要点。

相似文献

2
A Proposed Process for Risk Mitigation During the COVID-19 Pandemic.一种在新冠疫情期间减轻风险的提议流程。
Behav Anal Pract. 2020 Apr 23;13(2):299-305. doi: 10.1007/s40617-020-00430-1. eCollection 2020 Jun.
7
ABA Finding Its Heart During a Pandemic: An Exploration in Social Validity.行为分析协会在疫情期间找寻其核心:社会效度探索
Behav Anal Pract. 2020 Oct 16;13(4):757-766. doi: 10.1007/s40617-020-00517-9. eCollection 2020 Dec.
8
Canadian Contraception Consensus (Part 1 of 4).加拿大避孕共识(共4部分,第1部分)
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2015 Oct;37(10):936-42. doi: 10.1016/s1701-2163(16)30033-0.
9
Canadian Contraception Consensus (Part 2 of 4).加拿大避孕共识(共四部分,第二部分)
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2015 Nov;37(11):1033-9. doi: 10.1016/s1701-2163(16)30054-8.

引用本文的文献

7
Adapting Direct Services for Telehealth: A Practical Tutorial.适应远程医疗的直接服务:实用教程。
Behav Anal Pract. 2021 Oct 12;14(4):1010-1046. doi: 10.1007/s40617-020-00529-5. eCollection 2021 Dec.

本文引用的文献

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