Uncovering social structures and informational prejudices to reduce inequity in delivery and uptake of new molecular technologies.
Professional - professional relationship
genetic information
informed consent
quality of health care
sociology
Journal
Journal of medical ethics
ISSN: 1473-4257
Titre abrégé: J Med Ethics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7513619
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2020
11 2020
Historique:
received:
26
07
2019
revised:
16
11
2019
accepted:
19
11
2019
pubmed:
9
1
2020
medline:
18
9
2021
entrez:
9
1
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Advances in molecular technologies have the potential to help remedy health inequities through earlier detection and prevention; if, however, their delivery and uptake (and therefore any benefits associated with such testing) are not more carefully considered, there is a very real risk that existing inequities in access and use will be further exacerbated. We argue this risk relates to the way that information and knowledge about the technology is both acquired and shared, or not, between health practitioners and their patients.A healthcare system can be viewed as a complex social network comprising individuals with different worldviews, hierarchies, professional cultures and subcultures and personal beliefs, both for those giving and receiving care. When healthcare practitioners are not perceived as knowledge equals, they would experience informational prejudices, and the result is that knowledge dissemination across and between them would be impeded. The uptake and delivery of a new technology may be inequitable as a result. Patients would also experience informational prejudice when they are viewed as not being able to understand the information that is presented to them, and information may be withheld.Informational prejudices driven by social relations and structures have thus far been underexplored in considering (in)equitable implementation and uptake of new molecular technologies. Every healthcare interaction represents an opportunity for experiencing informational prejudice, and with it the risk of being inappropriately informed for undertaking (or offering) such screening or testing. Making knowledge acquisition and information dissemination, and experiences of informational prejudice, explicit through sociologically framed investigations would extend our understandings of (in)equity, and offer ways to affect network relationships and structures that support equity in delivery and uptake.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31911498
pii: medethics-2019-105734
doi: 10.1136/medethics-2019-105734
pmc: PMC7656149
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
763-767Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Cancer. 2014 Oct 1;120(19):3066-73
pubmed: 24962202
Front Oncol. 2018 Sep 04;8:346
pubmed: 30234014
Med Care Res Rev. 2014 Dec;71(6):619-60
pubmed: 25380607
J Interprof Care. 2005 May;19 Suppl 1:188-96
pubmed: 16096155
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2004 Dec;58(12):971-5
pubmed: 15547054
N Z Med J. 2018 Aug 17;131(1480):81-89
pubmed: 30116069
Evid Based Nurs. 2019 Jan;22(1):7-9
pubmed: 30504450
Am J Public Health. 2013 Jan;103(1):50-6
pubmed: 23153125
Eur J Hum Genet. 2016 Jun;24(6):809-16
pubmed: 26508572
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2017 Mar;15(3):346-354
pubmed: 28275035
Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2015 Aug;62(8):1374-80
pubmed: 25832998
Br J Gen Pract. 2017 Dec;67(665):540-541
pubmed: 29192097
Clin Genet. 2008 Feb;73(2):132-8
pubmed: 18177468
Genet Med. 2017 Mar;19(3):345-351
pubmed: 27632687
Qual Saf Health Care. 2006 Aug;15(4):229-30
pubmed: 16885244
Curr Genet Med Rep. 2019;7(2):85-91
pubmed: 31281738
J Community Genet. 2016 Apr;7(2):119-26
pubmed: 26536881
J Genet Couns. 2016 Feb;25(1):62-72
pubmed: 25911622
Lancet. 2012 Sep 15;380(9846):1011-29
pubmed: 22964159
Med Health Care Philos. 2014 Nov;17(4):529-40
pubmed: 24740808
Genet Test Mol Biomarkers. 2013 Sep;17(9):647-8
pubmed: 24000888
Midwifery. 2017 Feb;45:50-55
pubmed: 28024229
Genet Med. 2003 Mar-Apr;5(2):69
pubmed: 12644774
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Aug 1;34(22):2610-8
pubmed: 27161971
Hum Mol Genet. 2018 May 1;27(R1):R8-R13
pubmed: 29522190
Gynecol Oncol. 2019 Apr;153(1):184-191
pubmed: 30711300
J Genet Couns. 2019 Apr;28(2):407-418
pubmed: 30629780
Fam Cancer. 2019 Oct;18(4):465-469
pubmed: 31531760
Genet Med. 2008 Jun;10(6):404-14
pubmed: 18496223
Am J Hum Genet. 2017 Mar 2;100(3):414-427
pubmed: 28190457