Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1136/medethics-2020-106487 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1136/medethics-2020-106487 32769095!7415071!32769095     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       J+Med+Ethics 2020 ; 46 (10): 646-651 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=32769095|t=2020. Tragic choices in intensive care during the COVID-19 pandemic: on fairness, consistency and community |pdf=|usr=}}{{32769095}} gab.com Text Tragic choices in intensive care during the COVID-19 pandemic: on fairness, consistency and community JO: J Med Ethics http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32769095 #FOAvip Tragic choices arise during the COVID-19 pandemic when the limited resources made available in acute medical settings cannot be accessed by all patients who need them. In these circumstances, healthcare rationing is unavoidable. It is important in any healthcare rationing process that the interests of the community are recognised, and that decision-making upholds these interests through a fair and consistent process of decision-making. Responding to recent calls (1) to safeguard individuals' legal rights in decision-making in intensive care, and (2) for new authoritative national guidance for decision-making, this paper seeks to clarify what consistency and fairness demand in healthcare rationing during the COVID-19 pandemic, from both a legal and ethical standpoint. The paper begins with a brief review of UK law concerning healthcare resource allocation, considering how community interests and individual rights have been marshalled in judicial deliberation about the use of limited health resources within the National Health Service (NHS). It is then argued that an important distinction needs to be drawn between procedural and outcome consistency, and that a procedurally consistent decision-making process ought to be favoured. Congruent with the position that UK courts have adopted for resource allocation decision-making in the NHS more generally, specific requirements for a procedural framework and substantive triage criteria to be applied within that framework during the COVID-19 pandemic are considered in detail. Twit Text FOAVip Tragic choices in intensive care during the COVID-19 pandemic: on fairness, consistency and community ????J Med Ethics http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32769095 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32769095 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|32769095}}</ref> Tragic choices in intensive care during the COVID-19 pandemic: on fairness, consistency and community #MMPMID32769095 Newdick C; Sheehan M; Dunn M J Med Ethics 2020[Oct]; 46 (10): 646-651 PMID32769095show ga Tragic choices arise during the COVID-19 pandemic when the limited resources made available in acute medical settings cannot be accessed by all patients who need them. In these circumstances, healthcare rationing is unavoidable. It is important in any healthcare rationing process that the interests of the community are recognised, and that decision-making upholds these interests through a fair and consistent process of decision-making. Responding to recent calls (1) to safeguard individuals' legal rights in decision-making in intensive care, and (2) for new authoritative national guidance for decision-making, this paper seeks to clarify what consistency and fairness demand in healthcare rationing during the COVID-19 pandemic, from both a legal and ethical standpoint. The paper begins with a brief review of UK law concerning healthcare resource allocation, considering how community interests and individual rights have been marshalled in judicial deliberation about the use of limited health resources within the National Health Service (NHS). It is then argued that an important distinction needs to be drawn between procedural and outcome consistency, and that a procedurally consistent decision-making process ought to be favoured. Congruent with the position that UK courts have adopted for resource allocation decision-making in the NHS more generally, specific requirements for a procedural framework and substantive triage criteria to be applied within that framework during the COVID-19 pandemic are considered in detail. |Betacoronavirus[MESH] |COVID-19[MESH] |Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology/*therapy[MESH] |Critical Care/*ethics/legislation & jurisprudence[MESH] |Decision Making/*ethics[MESH] |Health Care Rationing/*ethics/legislation & jurisprudence[MESH] |Humans[MESH] |Pandemics[MESH] |Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology/*therapy[MESH] |SARS-CoV-2[MESH] |State Medicine[MESH]Tragic choices in intensive care during the COVID-19 pandemic: on fair(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing