• 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

公共卫生中的助推困境:对丹麦小册子的伦理分析

Dilemmas of nudging in public health: an ethical analysis of a Danish pamphlet.

机构信息

Department of Philosophy, School of Communication and Society, Aarhus University, Jens Chr. Skous Vej 7, Aarhus C 8000, Denmark.

Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, Bartholins Allé 2, Aarhus C 8000, Denmark.

出版信息

Health Promot Int. 2021 Aug 30;36(4):1140-1150. doi: 10.1093/heapro/daaa146.

DOI:10.1093/heapro/daaa146
PMID:33367635
Abstract

Nudging has been discussed in the context of public health, and ethical issues raised by nudging in public health contexts have been highlighted. In this article, we first identify types of nudging approaches and techniques that have been used in screening programmes, and ethical issues that have been associated with nudging: paternalism, limited autonomy and manipulation. We then identify nudging techniques used in a pamphlet developed for the Danish National Screening Program for Colorectal Cancer. These include framing, default nudge, use of hassle bias, authority nudge and priming. The pamphlet and the very offering of a screening programme can in themselves be considered nudges. Whether nudging strategies are ethically problematic depend on whether they are categorized as educative- or non-educative nudges. Educative nudges seek to affect people's choice making by engaging their reflective capabilities. Non-educative nudges work by circumventing people's reflective capabilities. Information materials are, on the face of it, meant to engage citizens' reflective capacities. Recipients are likely to receive information materials with this expectation, and thus not expect to be affected in other ways. Non-educative nudges may therefore be particularly problematic in the context of information on screening, also as participating in screening does not always benefit the individual.

摘要

推动已在公共卫生领域进行了讨论,并且强调了在公共卫生背景下推动所引发的伦理问题。在本文中,我们首先确定了在筛选计划中使用的推动方法和技术的类型,以及与推动相关的伦理问题:家长主义、有限的自主权和操纵。然后,我们确定了用于丹麦国家大肠癌筛查计划的小册子中使用的推动技术。这些包括框架、默认推动、利用麻烦偏见、权威推动和启动。小册子和筛查计划本身就可以被视为推动。推动策略是否存在伦理问题取决于它们是否被归类为教育性或非教育性推动。教育性推动旨在通过吸引人们的反思能力来影响人们的决策。非教育性推动通过绕过人们的反思能力起作用。信息材料从表面上看,旨在吸引公民的反思能力。收件人很可能会带着这种期望收到信息材料,因此不会期望以其他方式受到影响。因此,在关于筛查的信息背景下,非教育性推动可能特别成问题,因为参与筛查并不总是对个人有益。

相似文献

1
Dilemmas of nudging in public health: an ethical analysis of a Danish pamphlet.公共卫生中的助推困境:对丹麦小册子的伦理分析
Health Promot Int. 2021 Aug 30;36(4):1140-1150. doi: 10.1093/heapro/daaa146.
2
Nudge or Grudge? Choice Architecture and Parental Decision-Making.推动还是抵触?选择架构与父母决策。
Hastings Cent Rep. 2018 Mar;48(2):33-39. doi: 10.1002/hast.837.
3
Nudging in the clinic: the ethical implications of differences in doctors' and patients' point of view.在诊所中的助推:医生和患者观点差异的伦理影响。
J Med Ethics. 2019 Mar;45(3):183-189. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2018-104978. Epub 2018 Oct 25.
4
Ethical Criteria for Health-Promoting Nudges: A Case-by-Case Analysis.促进健康的助推的伦理标准:案例分析。
Am J Bioeth. 2019 May;19(5):48-59. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2019.1588411.
5
Under consumers' scrutiny - an investigation into consumers' attitudes and concerns about nudging in the realm of health behavior.在消费者审视之下——关于消费者对健康行为领域助推的态度及担忧的调查
BMC Public Health. 2015 Apr 9;15:336. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-1691-8.
6
Nudging in screening: Literature review and ethical guidance.推动筛检:文献回顾与伦理指引。
Patient Educ Couns. 2018 Sep;101(9):1561-1569. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2018.03.021. Epub 2018 Mar 27.
7
Nudging for others' sake: An ethical analysis of the legitimacy of nudging healthcare workers to accept influenza immunization.为他人推动:对推动医护人员接受流感免疫接种的合宜性的伦理分析。
Bioethics. 2021 Feb;35(2):143-150. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12819. Epub 2020 Oct 13.
8
Public health nudges: weighing individual liberty and population health benefits.公共卫生推动因素:权衡个人自由和人口健康效益。
J Med Ethics. 2021 Nov;47(11):756-760. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106077. Epub 2020 Oct 30.
9
[The ethics of health nudges: a discussion about their acceptability in public health.].[健康助推的伦理:关于其在公共卫生领域可接受性的讨论。]
Rev Esp Salud Publica. 2022 Oct 5;96:e202210062.
10
[Nudge strategies at a glance: an overview. More freedom or new paternalism?].[一目了然的助推策略:概述。更多自由还是新家长主义?]
Epidemiol Prev. 2016 Nov-Dec;40(6):462-465. doi: 10.19191/EP16.6.P462.127.

引用本文的文献

1
Attitudes towards being offered a choice of self-sampling or clinician sampling for cervical screening: A cross-sectional survey of women taking part in a clinical validation of HPV self-collection devices.对宫颈筛查中提供自我采样或临床医生采样选择的态度:对参与HPV自我采集设备临床验证的女性的横断面调查。
J Med Screen. 2025 Jun;32(2):93-99. doi: 10.1177/09691413241283356. Epub 2024 Oct 9.
2
Smartphone Apps for Food Purchase Choices: Scoping Review of Designs, Opportunities, and Challenges.智能手机应用程序在食物购买选择中的应用:设计、机会和挑战的范围综述。
J Med Internet Res. 2024 Mar 6;26:e45904. doi: 10.2196/45904.
3
Evidence Review for Preventing Osteoarthritis After an Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: An Osteoarthritis Action Alliance Consensus Statement.
前交叉韧带损伤后预防骨关节炎的证据综述:骨关节炎行动联盟共识声明。
J Athl Train. 2023 Mar 1;58(3):198-219. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-0504.22.