Article info
PDFStudent essay
Non-maleficence and the ethics of consent to cancer screening
- Correspondence to Dr Lotte Elton, Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1TN, UK; lotteelton{at}gmail.com
Citation
Non-maleficence and the ethics of consent to cancer screening
Publication history
- Received February 6, 2020
- Revised July 14, 2020
- Accepted August 12, 2020
- First published September 21, 2020.
Online issue publication
June 24, 2021
Article Versions
- Previous version (24 June 2021).
- 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
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- Effects of communicating individual risks in screening programmes: Cochrane systematic review
- Fair, just and compassionate: A pilot for making allocation decisions for patients requesting experimental drugs outside of clinical trials
- Temporal trend in socioeconomic inequalities in the uptake of cancer screening programmes in France between 2005 and 2010: results from the Cancer Barometer surveys
- Patients’ experience of using colonoscopy as a diagnostic test after a positive FOBT/FIT: a systematic review of the quantitative literature
- Staff experiences of diabetes care in residential care facilities for people with severe disabilities in Denmark: a mixed-methods assessment of access to screening for diabetes complications
- Improving uptake of colorectal cancer screening by complex patients at an academic primary care practice: a feasibility study
- To nudge or not to nudge: cancer screening programmes and the limits of libertarian paternalism
- Screening for cardiovascular risk: public health imperative or matter for individual informed choice?
- Impact of an informed choice invitation on uptake of screening for diabetes in primary care (DICISION): randomised trial
- Healthcare professionals’ and researchers’ understanding of cancer genetics activities: a qualitative interview study