Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Health care is developing rapidly. So are its correlates, such as health care technology, research, education, administration, communication, and more. Such change requires ethical deliberation, as change that is not ethically guided poses unnecessary risks. This may be particularly true in relation to health care, which impacts some of the most central domains of human life. Bioethics addresses issues of health care ethics. It consists of approaches that attempt to resolve moral conflicts, viewed as conflicts among moral values that may each be acceptable in some circumstances but that require prioritizing when combined with other moral values in particular circumstances. Such approaches include the application of theories such as consequentialism, which refers to outcomes (such as happiness); deontology, which refers to duties or intentions (such as the obligation not to lie); virtue ethics, which refers to character features (such as honesty); principlism, which refers to the four principles of upholding autonomy (self-determination), beneficence (best interests), non-maleficence (least harm), and justice (as fairness, for example); and more (Beauchamp & Childress, 2009; Rudnick, 2001; Rudnick, 2002). Bioethics ranges across many areas and its scope is still broadening. Some of its emerging areas address organizational bioethics, global bioethics, and much more. This book focuses on a sample of emerging as well as more established areas of bioethics. The chapters were selected according to various considerations, such as interest of authors. Yet in spite of not being exhaustive, this book illustrates the range and impact of bioethics in the 21st century. As part of that, some of the chapters go beyond fact and theory into some speculation (the chapters with more speculative topics can be found near the end of this book). We think this is necessary for bioethics to be constructive, recognizing that speculation must be checked by common sense as well as by known fact and theory. Indeed this is how much of bioethics proceeds (Rudnick 2007). There are areas of bioethics that are not covered in this book, such as neuroethics, enhancement ethics, ethics of genetics, and more. We cannot touch on most of them here. Still, we would like to highlight neuroethics as a likely paradigm of an emerging area in bioethics. Neuroethics can be defined in part as the ethics of neuroscience (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics). More specifically, it can be viewed in part as
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,012 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,037 | 0,014 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».