Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorDao, B
dc.contributor.authorDouglas, T
dc.contributor.authorGiubilini, A
dc.contributor.authorSavulescu, J
dc.contributor.authorSelgelid, M
dc.contributor.authorFaber, NS
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-09T12:59:26Z
dc.date.issued2019-03-25
dc.description.abstractBackground: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global public health disaster driven largely by antibiotic use in human health care. Doctors considering whether to prescribe antibiotics face an ethical conflict between upholding individual patient health and advancing public health aims. Existing literature mainly examines whether patients awaiting consultations desire or expect to receive antibiotic prescriptions, but does not report views of the wider public regarding conditions under which doctors should prescribe antibiotics. It also does not explore the ethical significance of public views or their sensitivity to awareness of AMR risks or the standpoint (self-interested or impartial) taken by participants. Methods: An online survey was conducted with a sample of the U.S. public (n = 158). Participants were asked to indicate what relative priority should be given to individual patients and society-at-large from various standpoints and in various contexts, including antibiotic prescription. Results: Of the participants, 50.3% thought that doctors should generally prioritize individual patients over society, whereas 32.0% prioritized society over individual patients. When asked in the context of AMR, 39.2% prioritized individuals whereas 45.5% prioritized society. Participants were significantly less willing to prioritize society over individuals when they themselves were the patient, both in general (p = .001) and in relation to AMR specifically (p = .006). Conclusions: Participants’ attitudes were more oriented to society and sensitive to collective responsibility when informed about the social costs of antibiotic use and when considered from a third-person rather than first-person perspective. That is, as participants came closer to taking the perspective of an informed and impartial “ideal observer,” their support for prioritizing society increased. Our findings suggest that, insofar as antibiotic policies and practices should be informed by attitudes that are impartial and well-informed, there is significant support for prioritizing society.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipOxford Martin Programme on Collective Responsibility for Infectious Diseaseen_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipWellcome Trusten_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipVictorian State Government, Operational Infrastructure Support (OIS) Programen_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipUehiro Foundation on Ethics and Educationen_GB
dc.identifier.citationVol. 10 (1), pp. 63 - 69en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/23294515.2019.1576799
dc.identifier.grantnumber104848/Z/14/Zen_GB
dc.identifier.grantnumber203132/Z/16/Zen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/38606
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherTaylor & Francisen_GB
dc.rights© 2019 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.en_GB
dc.subjectDrug resistanceen_GB
dc.subjectmicrobialen_GB
dc.subjectdrug resistanceen_GB
dc.subjectbacterialen_GB
dc.subjectantibacterial agentsen_GB
dc.subjectpatient preferenceen_GB
dc.subjectmedical overuseen_GB
dc.subjectethicsen_GB
dc.titleImpartiality and infectious disease: Prioritizing individuals versus the collective in antibiotic prescriptionen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2019-09-09T12:59:26Z
dc.identifier.issn2329-4515
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available on open access from Taylor & Francis via the DOI in this recorden_GB
dc.identifier.journalAJOB Empirical Bioethicsen_GB
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_GB
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2019-03-25
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2019-09-09T12:53:55Z
refterms.versionFCDVoR
refterms.dateFOA2019-09-09T12:59:32Z
refterms.panelAen_GB
refterms.depositExceptionpublishedGoldOA


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2019 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © 2019 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.