Article info
PDFClinical ethics
Paper
Sources of bias in clinical ethics case deliberation
- Correspondence to Dr Morten Magelssen, Centre for Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Pb. 1130 Blindern, Oslo N-0318, Norway; magelssen{at}gmail.com
Citation
Sources of bias in clinical ethics case deliberation
Publication history
- Received May 28, 2013
- Revised August 6, 2013
- Accepted August 28, 2013
- First published September 18, 2013.
Online issue publication
September 18, 2014
Article Versions
- Previous version (18 September 2013).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions
Other content recommended for you
- Bioethics and multiculturalism: nuancing the discussion
- Sweetening the scent: commentary on “What principlism misses”
- The problem of ‘thick in status, thin in content’ in Beauchamp and Childress' principlism
- Determining the common morality's norms in the sixth edition of Principles of Biomedical Ethics
- Why not common morality?
- 30 Years Principles of biomedical ethics: introduction to a symposium on the 6th edition of Tom L Beauchamp and James F Childress' seminal work
- 30 Years Principles of biomedical ethics: introduction to a symposium on the 6th edition of Tom L Beauchamp and James F Childress' seminal work
- What principlism misses
- Ethics needs principles—four can encompass the rest—and respect for autonomy should be “first among equals”
- A waste of time: the problem of common morality in Principles of Biomedical Ethics