Article Text
PDFResponse
Response to commentaries: ‘autonomy-based criticisms of the patient preference predictor’
Abstract
The authors respond to four JME commentaries on their Feature Article, ‘Autonomy-based criticisms of the patient preference predictor’.
- Autonomy
- Statistics
- Personal Autonomy
- Mental Competency
- Decision Making
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors DWa and DWe contributed equally.
Funding This work was supported by intramural funding of the NIH Clinical Center.
Disclaimer The views expressed in this paper are solely the authors’ and do not represent those of the NIH, HHS, or any part of the U.S. Federal Government.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Autonomy-based criticisms of the patient preference predictor
- Respect for autonomy: deciding what is good for oneself
- Clarifying substituted judgement: the endorsed life approach
- Ethics needs principles—four can encompass the rest—and respect for autonomy should be “first among equals”
- Authenticity and autonomy in deep-brain stimulation
- Consent for anaesthesia
- The unfeasibility of requests for euthanasia in advance directives
- Ethics of care challenge to advance directives for dementia patients
- Defending the four principles approach as a good basis for good medical practice and therefore for good medical ethics
- A case study from the perspective of medical ethics: refusal of treatment in an ambulance