首页> 外文期刊>American journal of bioethics >Contact with Pharmaceutical Representatives: Where Does Prudence Lead?
【24h】

Contact with Pharmaceutical Representatives: Where Does Prudence Lead?

机译:与药品代表联系:审慎原则在哪里进行?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

How do prudent people behave when the data available on the consequences of their actions are limited, but a de-cision as to how to behave must be made? With regard to the controversy over physicians' contacts with pharmaceu-tical representatives (referred to as "drug reps" by most clinicians, a usage that I follow here), Huddle (2010) cri-tiques the approach of the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC), which has urged academic medical cen-ters to shun such interactions. Huddle argues instead that contacts should not be precluded, but that efforts could be made to mitigate whatever negative effects might ensue. I suggest here that a broader view of the situation—taking four contextual elements into account—leads to a very dif-ferent conclusion about a situation that Huddle correctly characterizes as requiring a "prudential" response.
机译:当可获得的关于其行动后果的数据有限时,审慎的人将如何行事,但是必须做出如何行事的决定?关于医师与药学代表的联系的争议(大多数临床医生称为“药物代表”,我在此遵循的用法),Huddle(2010)批评了美国医学院联合会的做法(AAMC),它敦促学术医学中心避免这种相互作用。哈德(Huddle)辩称,不应该排除接触,但应努力减轻可能产生的负面影响。我在此建议,从更广泛的角度来看待这种情况(将四个上下文元素都考虑在内),可以得出关于哈德勒正确地描述为需要“审慎”回应的情况的不同结论。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号