Victoire Fokom Defo, MD and Joël Fokom Domgue, MD, MPH
HPV tests are alternatives to Pap smear screening that enable women to self-collect specimens and might be the best cervical cancer prevention strategy for many.
AMA J Ethics. 2020;22(2):E116-125. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2020.116.
Jesse Feierabend-Peters, MD, PhD and Hugh Silk, MD, MPH
Despite availability of good national oral health curricula for medical trainees, most physicians are ill-equipped to identify oral cancers or avoid unnecessary referrals.
AMA J Ethics. 2022;24(1):E19-26. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2022.19.
Aislinn C. Rookwood and Mariah Abney join Ethics Talk to discuss their article, coauthored with Hannah S. Butler-Robbins, Danielle Marie Westmark, and Dr Regina Idoate: “Arts-Based Research Methods to Explore Cancer in Indigenous Communities.”
Proliferation of innovative procedures and treatments in surgery has led to novel and distinct ethical challenges. Medicine can learn from plastic surgeons’ approaches to informed consent and potentially harmful treatments.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(4):349-356. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2018.20.4.nlit1-1804.
Consideration of what constitutes sufficient information about how donation protocols can interfere with a patient’s dying process is a key feature of consent processes.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(8):E708-716. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.708.
Barriers to effective prognosis conversations include knowledge deficits, misconceptions, cultural differences, and lack of motivation. These can be addressed head-on by good communication interventions.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(8):E757-765. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.757.
Shivan J. Mehta, MD, MBA and David A. Asch, MD, MBA
Outcome-based payment more closely aligns payments with what patients want, which is better health rather than more health care. But these approaches remain challenging to implement.
Medical education must acknowledge the problematic use of race as a biological or epidemiological risk factor in research and the controversy over race.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(6):518-527. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.6.peer1-1706.