Suppr超能文献

重新定义癌症:挑战关于癌症和癌症药物的话语——挪威视角:重新定义癌症。

Reframing cancer: challenging the discourse on cancer and cancer drugs-a Norwegian perspective : Reframing Cancer.

机构信息

Centre for Cancer Biomarkers, Centre for the Study of the Sciences and the Humanities, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.

出版信息

BMC Med Ethics. 2021 Sep 21;22(1):126. doi: 10.1186/s12910-021-00693-5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

As the range of therapeutic options in the field of oncology increases, so too does the strain on health care budgets. The imbalance between what is medically possible and financially feasible is frequently rendered as an issue of tragic choices, giving rise to public controversies around health care rationing.

MAIN BODY

We analyse the Norwegian media discourse on expensive cancer drugs and identify four underlying premises: (1) Cancer drugs are de facto expensive, and one does not and should not question why. (2) Cancer drugs have an indubitable efficacy. (3) Any lifetime gained for a cancer patient is an absolute good, and (4) cancer patients and doctors own the truth about cancer. Applying a principle-based approach, we argue that these premises should be challenged on moral grounds. Within the Norwegian public discourse, however, the premises largely remain unchallenged due to what we find to be unjustified claims of moral superiority. We therefore explore alternative framings of the issue of expensive cancer drugs and discuss their potential to escape the predicament of tragic choices.

CONCLUSIONS

In a media discourse that has seemingly stagnated, awareness of the framings within it is necessary in order to challenge the current tragic choices predicament the discourse finds itself in. In order to allow for a discourse not solely concerned with the issue of tragic choices, the premises that underlie it must be subjected to critical examination. As the field of oncology advances rapidly, we depend on a discussion of its opportunities and challenges that is meaningful, and that soberly addresses the future of cancer care-both its potential and its limits.

摘要

背景

随着肿瘤学领域治疗选择范围的扩大,医疗保健预算的压力也越来越大。医学上可行与经济上可行之间的不平衡经常被视为一个悲惨选择的问题,引发了围绕医疗保健配给的公众争议。

正文

我们分析了挪威媒体关于昂贵癌症药物的话语,并确定了四个基本前提:(1)癌症药物实际上是昂贵的,人们不应该也不应该质疑为什么。(2)癌症药物具有不可置疑的疗效。(3)癌症患者获得的任何寿命都是绝对的好处,(4)癌症患者和医生拥有关于癌症的真相。应用基于原则的方法,我们认为这些前提应该从道德角度提出质疑。然而,在挪威的公共话语中,由于我们发现对道德优越感的不合理主张,这些前提在很大程度上仍然没有受到质疑。因此,我们探讨了昂贵癌症药物问题的替代框架,并讨论了它们逃避悲惨选择困境的潜力。

结论

在一个看似停滞不前的媒体话语中,必须意识到其中的框架,以便挑战当前话语所陷入的悲惨选择困境。为了允许进行不仅仅关注悲惨选择问题的讨论,必须对其基础前提进行批判性审查。随着肿瘤学领域的快速发展,我们依赖于有意义的讨论其机遇和挑战,清醒地应对癌症护理的未来——包括其潜力和限制。

相似文献

3
Just caring: defining a basic benefit package.仅仅是关怀:界定基本福利套餐。
J Med Philos. 2011 Dec;36(6):589-611. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jhr052. Epub 2011 Dec 13.
4
The moral roots of environmental attitudes.环境态度的道德根源。
Psychol Sci. 2013 Jan 1;24(1):56-62. doi: 10.1177/0956797612449177. Epub 2012 Dec 10.
5
Looking at discourse in a literature review of nursing texts.审视护理文本的文献综述中的论述。
J Adv Nurs. 1996 Jun;23(6):1155-61. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1996.12612.x.
9
Justice and solidarity in priority setting in health care.医疗保健资源分配中的公平与团结
Health Care Anal. 2003 Dec;11(4):325-43. doi: 10.1023/B:HCAN.0000010061.71961.87.

本文引用的文献

2
Escaping the scarcity loop.摆脱稀缺循环。
Lancet. 2019 Jul 13;394(10193):112-113. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31556-9. Epub 2019 Jul 11.
8
From sick role to practices of health and illness.从病患角色到健康和疾病的实践。
Med Educ. 2013 Jan;47(1):18-25. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04298.x.

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