Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMinkoff, Howard
dc.contributor.authorZafra, Katherine
dc.contributor.authorAmrita, Sabharwal
dc.contributor.authorWilson, Tracey E
dc.contributor.authorHomel, Peter
dc.date.accessioned2023-09-27T16:27:25Z
dc.date.available2023-09-27T16:27:25Z
dc.date.issued2016-08-31
dc.identifier.citationMinkoff H, Zafra K, Amrita S, Wilson TE, Homel P. Physician morality and perinatal decisions. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016 Nov;206:36-40. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.08.042. Epub 2016 Aug 31. PMID: 27614269.en_US
dc.identifier.eissn1872-7654
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.08.042
dc.identifier.pmid27614269
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12648/13023
dc.description.abstractObjective: Given the same set of "facts" (e.g. fetal prognosis) different physicians may not give the same advice to patients. Studies have shown that people differ in how they prioritize moral domains, but how those domains influence counseling and management has not been assessed among obstetricians. Our objective was to see if, given the same set of facts, obstetricians' counseling would vary depending on their prioritization of moral domains.
dc.description.abstractDesign: Obstetricians completed questionnaires that included validated scales of moral domains (e.g. autonomy, community, divinity), demographic data, and hypothetical scenarios (e.g. how aggressively they would pursue the interests of a potentially compromised child, the degree of deference they gave to parents' choices, and their relative valuation of fetal rights and women's rights). Multivariate logistic regression using backwards conditional selection was used to explore how participants responded to the moral dilemma scenarios.
dc.description.abstractResults: Among the 249 participating obstetricians there was wide variation in counseling, much of which reflected differences in prioritization of moral domains. For example, requiring a higher likelihood of neonatal survival before recommending a cesarean section with cord prolapse was associated with Fairness/Reciprocity, an autonomy domain which emphasizes treating individuals equally (OR=1.42, 90% CI=1.06-1.89, p=0.05). Honoring parents' request to wait longer to suspend attempts to resuscitate an infant with no heart rate or pulse was associated with the community domains (involving concepts of loyalty and hierarchy) of In-Group/Loyalty; OR 1.30, 90% CI=1.04-1.62, p=0.05 and Authority/Respect (OR=1.34, 90% CI=1.06-1.34, p=0.045). Carrying out an unconsented cesarean section was associated with In-Group Loyalty (OR=1.26, 90% CI=1.01-1.56, p=0.08) and religiosity (OR=1.08, 90% CI=1.00-1.16, p=0.08).
dc.description.abstractConclusion: The advice that patients receive may vary widely depending on the underlying moral values of obstetricians. Physicians should be aware of their "biases" in order to provide the most objective counseling possible.
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.urlhttps://www.ejog.org/article/S0301-2115(16)30898-3/fulltexten_US
dc.rightsCopyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectBiasen_US
dc.subjectCounselingen_US
dc.subjectMoralityen_US
dc.subjectPerinatalen_US
dc.titlePhysician morality and perinatal decisions.en_US
dc.typeArticle/Reviewen_US
dc.source.journaltitleEuropean journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biologyen_US
dc.source.volume206
dc.source.beginpage36
dc.source.endpage40
dc.source.countryIreland
dc.description.versionVoRen_US
refterms.dateFOA2023-09-27T16:27:26Z
html.description.abstractObjective: Given the same set of "facts" (e.g. fetal prognosis) different physicians may not give the same advice to patients. Studies have shown that people differ in how they prioritize moral domains, but how those domains influence counseling and management has not been assessed among obstetricians. Our objective was to see if, given the same set of facts, obstetricians' counseling would vary depending on their prioritization of moral domains.
html.description.abstractDesign: Obstetricians completed questionnaires that included validated scales of moral domains (e.g. autonomy, community, divinity), demographic data, and hypothetical scenarios (e.g. how aggressively they would pursue the interests of a potentially compromised child, the degree of deference they gave to parents' choices, and their relative valuation of fetal rights and women's rights). Multivariate logistic regression using backwards conditional selection was used to explore how participants responded to the moral dilemma scenarios.
html.description.abstractResults: Among the 249 participating obstetricians there was wide variation in counseling, much of which reflected differences in prioritization of moral domains. For example, requiring a higher likelihood of neonatal survival before recommending a cesarean section with cord prolapse was associated with Fairness/Reciprocity, an autonomy domain which emphasizes treating individuals equally (OR=1.42, 90% CI=1.06-1.89, p=0.05). Honoring parents' request to wait longer to suspend attempts to resuscitate an infant with no heart rate or pulse was associated with the community domains (involving concepts of loyalty and hierarchy) of In-Group/Loyalty; OR 1.30, 90% CI=1.04-1.62, p=0.05 and Authority/Respect (OR=1.34, 90% CI=1.06-1.34, p=0.045). Carrying out an unconsented cesarean section was associated with In-Group Loyalty (OR=1.26, 90% CI=1.01-1.56, p=0.08) and religiosity (OR=1.08, 90% CI=1.00-1.16, p=0.08).
html.description.abstractConclusion: The advice that patients receive may vary widely depending on the underlying moral values of obstetricians. Physicians should be aware of their "biases" in order to provide the most objective counseling possible.
dc.description.institutionSUNY Downstateen_US
dc.description.departmentCommunity Health Sciencesen_US
dc.description.degreelevelN/Aen_US
dc.identifier.journalEuropean journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Publisher version
Thumbnail
Name:
PIIS0301211516308983.pdf
Size:
544.7Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.