首页 > 最新文献

Developing World Bioethics最新文献

英文 中文
Proportionality and Mexico's pandemic management during the COVID-19 crisis 新冠肺炎危机期间的比例和墨西哥的疫情管理。
IF 0.9 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Pub Date : 2023-10-17 DOI: 10.1111/dewb.12429
Felicitas Holzer, Ivette M. Ortiz Alcántara, Tobias Eichinger, Julian W. März

Mexico's pandemic management and the absence of measures have been harshly criticized as being disproportionate. This paper examines whether the proportionality principle was properly applied to Mexico's COVID-19 response and outlines three reasons against such an endeavor, namely (i) the content of “proportionate measures” remained insufficiently well defined, (ii) there were yet fundamental rights conflicts to resolve, and (iii) the situation was moreover characterized by epistemic uncertainty.

墨西哥的疫情管理和缺乏措施被严厉批评为不相称。本文研究了比例原则是否正确适用于墨西哥的新冠肺炎应对措施,并概述了反对这一努力的三个原因,即(i)“比例措施”的内容定义不够明确,(ii)仍有基本权利冲突需要解决,(iii)情况还具有认识上的不确定性。
{"title":"Proportionality and Mexico's pandemic management during the COVID-19 crisis","authors":"Felicitas Holzer,&nbsp;Ivette M. Ortiz Alcántara,&nbsp;Tobias Eichinger,&nbsp;Julian W. März","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12429","DOIUrl":"10.1111/dewb.12429","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Mexico's pandemic management and the absence of measures have been harshly criticized as being disproportionate. This paper examines whether the proportionality principle was properly applied to Mexico's COVID-19 response and outlines three reasons against such an endeavor, namely (i) the content of “proportionate measures” remained insufficiently well defined, (ii) there were yet fundamental rights conflicts to resolve, and (iii) the situation was moreover characterized by epistemic uncertainty.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":"24 4","pages":"302-309"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41240588","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Global health impact, priority and time 全球健康影响、优先事项和时间。
IF 2.2 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Pub Date : 2023-10-12 DOI: 10.1111/dewb.12428
Anders Herlitz

This paper addresses normative issues that arise in relation to indicators and measures of health impact. With inspiration from Nicole Hassoun's recent proposal, the paper argues and illustrates that those interested in measuring global health impact face questions about how to prioritize among those with ill-health, how to weigh benefits to those who cannot lead minimally good lives against benefits to the better off, and how to think about whether someone is badly off.

本文论述了与健康影响指标和衡量标准有关的规范性问题。该论文的灵感来自Nicole Hassoun最近的提案,它论证并说明了那些对衡量全球健康影响感兴趣的人面临的问题是,如何在健康不佳的人群中进行优先排序,如何权衡那些无法过上最低限度美好生活的人的利益与富裕人群的利益,以及如何思考某人是否过得很糟糕。
{"title":"Global health impact, priority and time","authors":"Anders Herlitz","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12428","DOIUrl":"10.1111/dewb.12428","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper addresses normative issues that arise in relation to indicators and measures of health impact. With inspiration from Nicole Hassoun's recent proposal, the paper argues and illustrates that those interested in measuring global health impact face questions about how to prioritize among those with ill-health, how to weigh benefits to those who cannot lead minimally good lives against benefits to the better off, and how to think about whether someone is badly off.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":"24 1","pages":"15-20"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dewb.12428","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41219235","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Examining the adequacy of preoperative informed consent in a developing country: Challenges in the era of surgical specialisation 检查发展中国家术前知情同意的充分性:外科专业化时代的挑战。
IF 0.9 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Pub Date : 2023-10-09 DOI: 10.1111/dewb.12427
Osita Ede, Oke R. Obadaseraye, Ifeanyi Anichi, Chisom Mbaeze, Chukwuka O. Udemezue, Chinonso Basil-Nwachuku, Kenechi A. Madu, Emmanuel C. Iyidobi, Udo E. Anyaehie, Cajetan U. Nwadinigwe, Chidinma Ngwangwa, Uto Essien Adetula

Preoperative informed consent is a legal and ethical requirement that ensures patients understand a procedure, its associated risks and benefits, alternative treatment options, and potential complications to make an informed decision about their care. This cross-sectional study evaluated the informed consent process for major orthopaedic surgeries at a tertiary hospital in Nigeria. A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from 120 adult participants. Results showed that many patients do not read the consent form before signing it, and surgeons do not adequately explain the alternatives to surgery, potential risks, and available anaesthetic options. Higher-educated patients are more likely to read the consent form. Surgeons performed well in explaining the nature of the condition and prognosis, the procedure's potential benefits, and answering patients' questions. The study emphasises the need to improve the informed consent process to ensure patients understand and can make rational decisions about their healthcare.

术前知情同意是一项法律和伦理要求,确保患者了解手术及其相关风险和益处、替代治疗方案和潜在并发症,以便对其护理做出知情决定。这项横断面研究评估了尼日利亚一家三级医院重大整形外科手术的知情同意程序。使用自填问卷从120名成年参与者中收集数据。结果显示,许多患者在签署同意书之前没有阅读同意书,外科医生也没有充分解释手术的替代方案、潜在风险和可用的麻醉方案。受过高等教育的患者更有可能阅读同意书。外科医生在解释病情和预后的性质、手术的潜在益处以及回答患者的问题方面表现良好。这项研究强调需要改进知情同意程序,以确保患者了解并能够对他们的医疗保健做出合理的决定。
{"title":"Examining the adequacy of preoperative informed consent in a developing country: Challenges in the era of surgical specialisation","authors":"Osita Ede,&nbsp;Oke R. Obadaseraye,&nbsp;Ifeanyi Anichi,&nbsp;Chisom Mbaeze,&nbsp;Chukwuka O. Udemezue,&nbsp;Chinonso Basil-Nwachuku,&nbsp;Kenechi A. Madu,&nbsp;Emmanuel C. Iyidobi,&nbsp;Udo E. Anyaehie,&nbsp;Cajetan U. Nwadinigwe,&nbsp;Chidinma Ngwangwa,&nbsp;Uto Essien Adetula","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12427","DOIUrl":"10.1111/dewb.12427","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Preoperative informed consent is a legal and ethical requirement that ensures patients understand a procedure, its associated risks and benefits, alternative treatment options, and potential complications to make an informed decision about their care. This cross-sectional study evaluated the informed consent process for major orthopaedic surgeries at a tertiary hospital in Nigeria. A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from 120 adult participants. Results showed that many patients do not read the consent form before signing it, and surgeons do not adequately explain the alternatives to surgery, potential risks, and available anaesthetic options. Higher-educated patients are more likely to read the consent form. Surgeons performed well in explaining the nature of the condition and prognosis, the procedure's potential benefits, and answering patients' questions. The study emphasises the need to improve the informed consent process to ensure patients understand and can make rational decisions about their healthcare.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":"24 4","pages":"296-301"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41150864","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Are Turkish doctors in deep water? The role of professional ethics and factors affecting the medical brain drain: A qualitative study from Turkey 土耳其医生陷入困境了吗?职业道德的作用和影响医学人才流失的因素:一项来自土耳其的定性研究。
IF 0.9 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Pub Date : 2023-10-03 DOI: 10.1111/dewb.12426
F. Gülsüm Önal, Fatih Erkan Akay

With the increased rate of the Turkish medical brain drain (MDB) in recent years, there is a need for more comprehensive studies to elucidate its vague migratory factors. The aim of this paper is to try to narrow that gap by analyzing present impacts of the MDB in Turkey and to evaluate if these aspects were driven by professional ethical values, and if so, what ethical principles they were based on. In-depth interviews were conducted with 19 doctors from various backgrounds, followed by a thematic analysis. The MDB in Turkey demonstrated a multifactorial structure, with prominent push factors that are intertwined at macro-meso-micro levels. The effort to maintain the principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, and protecting professional autonomy were the most important in the context of professional ethics. Only deep-rooted regulations might ensure the prevention of the MDB in Turkey and the prospect of doctors returning in the future. Conclusively, the recent criticisms the MDB has been garnering may inspire improvements in deteriorating human and health rights in Turkey.

近年来,随着土耳其医学人才外流率的上升,有必要进行更全面的研究来阐明其模糊的迁移因素。本文的目的是试图通过分析MDB在土耳其的当前影响来缩小这一差距,并评估这些方面是否是由职业道德价值观驱动的,如果是,它们基于什么道德原则。对来自不同背景的19名医生进行了深入访谈,然后进行了主题分析。土耳其的多边发展银行表现出多因素结构,具有突出的推动因素,这些因素在宏观-中微观层面交织在一起。在职业道德的背景下,维护慈善、非恶意和保护职业自主权的原则是最重要的。只有根深蒂固的法规才能确保MDB在土耳其的预防和医生未来回国的前景。总之,多边发展银行最近受到的批评可能会激励土耳其改善日益恶化的人权和健康权利。
{"title":"Are Turkish doctors in deep water? The role of professional ethics and factors affecting the medical brain drain: A qualitative study from Turkey","authors":"F. Gülsüm Önal,&nbsp;Fatih Erkan Akay","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12426","DOIUrl":"10.1111/dewb.12426","url":null,"abstract":"<p>With the increased rate of the Turkish medical brain drain (MDB) in recent years, there is a need for more comprehensive studies to elucidate its vague migratory factors. The aim of this paper is to try to narrow that gap by analyzing present impacts of the MDB in Turkey and to evaluate if these aspects were driven by professional ethical values, and if so, what ethical principles they were based on. In-depth interviews were conducted with 19 doctors from various backgrounds, followed by a thematic analysis. The MDB in Turkey demonstrated a multifactorial structure, with prominent push factors that are intertwined at macro-meso-micro levels. The effort to maintain the principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, and protecting professional autonomy were the most important in the context of professional ethics. Only deep-rooted regulations might ensure the prevention of the MDB in Turkey and the prospect of doctors returning in the future. Conclusively, the recent criticisms the MDB has been garnering may inspire improvements in deteriorating human and health rights in Turkey.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":"24 4","pages":"284-295"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11626997/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41168681","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Editors' statement on the responsible use of generative artificial intelligence technologies in scholarly journal publishing 编辑关于在学术期刊出版中负责任地使用生成人工智能技术的声明。
IF 2.2 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Pub Date : 2023-10-01 DOI: 10.1111/dewb.12424
Gregory E. Kaebnick, David Christopher Magnus, Audiey Kao, Mohammad Hosseini, David Resnik, Veljko Dubljević, Christy Rentmeester, Bert Gordijn
<p>The new generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools, and especially the large language models (LLMs) of which ChatGPT is the most prominent example, have the potential to transform many aspects of scholarly publishing. How the transformations will play out remains to be seen, both because the different parties involved in the production and publication of scholarly work are still learning about these tools and because the tools themselves are still in development, but the tools have a vast range of potential uses. Authors are likely to use generative AI to conduct research, frame their thoughts, produce data, search for ways of articulating their thoughts, develop drafts, generate text, revise their writing, and create visuals. Peer reviewers might use AI to help them produce their reviews. Editors might use AI in the initial editorial screening of manuscripts, to locate reviewers, or for copyediting.</p><p>We are editors of bioethics and humanities journals who have been contemplating the implications of this ongoing transformation. We believe that generative AI may pose a threat to the goals that animate our work but could also be valuable for achieving those goals. We do not pretend to have resolved the many social questions that we think generative AI raises for scholarly publishing, but in the interest of fostering a wider conversation about these questions, we have developed a preliminary set of recommendations about generative AI in scholarly publishing. We hope that the recommendations and rationales set out here will help the scholarly community navigate toward a deeper understanding of the strengths, limits, and challenges of AI for responsible scholarly work.</p><p>The stance set out here is consistent with those taken by the Committee on Publishing Ethics and many journal publishers, including those that publish or provide publishing services to the journals we edit. Previous position statements have addressed concerns about the use of AI for peer review and the importance of reviewers revealing to authors if they used AI in their review.5 However, to our knowledge, none have addressed the importance of using human reviewers to review manuscripts and editors retaining final decisions over what reviewers to select. Our stance differs from the position of <i>Science</i> magazine, which holds not only that a generative AI tool cannot be an author but also that “text generated by ChatGPT (or any other AI tools) cannot be used in the work, nor can figures, images, or graphics be the products of such tools.”6 Such a proscription is too broad and may be impossible to enforce, in our view. Yet we recognize that the ethical issues raised by generative AI are complex, and we have struggled to decide how editors should promote responsible use of these technologies. Over time, we hope, the community of scholars will develop professional norms about the appropriate ways of using these new tools. Reviewers and readers, not just editors, will h
新的生成式人工智能(AI)工具,尤其是大型语言模型(LLMs)(ChatGPT 就是其中最突出的例子),有可能改变学术出版的许多方面。由于参与学术著作制作和出版的各方仍在学习这些工具,而且这些工具本身仍在开发之中,因此如何实现变革仍有待观察,但这些工具具有广泛的潜在用途。作者可能会使用生成式人工智能进行研究、构思、生成数据、寻找表达思想的方式、编写草稿、生成文本、修改文章和创建视觉效果。同行评审员可以使用人工智能来帮助他们撰写评审意见。我们是生物伦理学和人文学科期刊的编辑,一直在思考这种持续变革的影响。我们认为,生成式人工智能可能会对我们的工作目标构成威胁,但也可能对实现这些目标有价值。我们并不自诩已经解决了我们认为人工智能生成技术给学术出版业带来的诸多社会问题,但为了促进有关这些问题的更广泛对话,我们就学术出版业中的人工智能生成技术提出了一系列初步建议。我们希望这里提出的建议和理由能够帮助学术界更深入地了解人工智能在负责任的学术工作中的优势、局限和挑战。这里提出的立场与出版伦理委员会和许多期刊出版商(包括那些出版我们编辑的期刊或为其提供出版服务的期刊出版商)所采取的立场是一致的。以前的立场声明曾涉及对使用人工智能进行同行评审的担忧,以及审稿人向作者透露他们是否在评审中使用了人工智能的重要性。我们的立场与《科学》杂志的立场不同,后者不仅认为人工智能生成工具不能成为作者,而且认为 "作品中不能使用ChatGPT(或任何其他人工智能工具)生成的文本,数字、图像或图形也不能是此类工具的产物 "6 。然而,我们认识到,生成式人工智能所引发的伦理问题非常复杂,我们一直在努力决定编辑应如何促进负责任地使用这些技术。我们希望,随着时间的推移,学者群体将就使用这些新工具的适当方式制定出专业规范。对于这些规范,审稿人和读者,而不仅仅是编辑,将有很多话要说。事实上,生成式人工智能技术的使用方式多种多样,其变化速度之快可能会使详细的编辑政策声明变得无效或不切实际。相反,依靠基于生成式人工智能技术更广泛的公众对话而不断发展的专业规范,可能会成为最佳的前进方式。戴维-雷斯尼克对这篇社论的贡献得到了美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)国家环境卫生科学研究所(NIEHS)校内研究计划的支持。Mohammad Hosseini的贡献得到了美国国家促进转化科学中心(NCATS)(通过UL1TR001422基金)的支持。资助者没有参与设计、分析、发表决定或手稿的撰写。Veljko Dubljević的部分贡献得到了美国国家科学基金会(NSF)CAREER奖(#2043612)的支持。本研究不代表美国国家健康与卫生研究所(NIEHS)、美国国家癌症研究中心(NCATS)、美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)、美国国家科学基金会(NSF)或美国政府的观点。
{"title":"Editors' statement on the responsible use of generative artificial intelligence technologies in scholarly journal publishing","authors":"Gregory E. Kaebnick,&nbsp;David Christopher Magnus,&nbsp;Audiey Kao,&nbsp;Mohammad Hosseini,&nbsp;David Resnik,&nbsp;Veljko Dubljević,&nbsp;Christy Rentmeester,&nbsp;Bert Gordijn","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12424","DOIUrl":"10.1111/dewb.12424","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;The new generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools, and especially the large language models (LLMs) of which ChatGPT is the most prominent example, have the potential to transform many aspects of scholarly publishing. How the transformations will play out remains to be seen, both because the different parties involved in the production and publication of scholarly work are still learning about these tools and because the tools themselves are still in development, but the tools have a vast range of potential uses. Authors are likely to use generative AI to conduct research, frame their thoughts, produce data, search for ways of articulating their thoughts, develop drafts, generate text, revise their writing, and create visuals. Peer reviewers might use AI to help them produce their reviews. Editors might use AI in the initial editorial screening of manuscripts, to locate reviewers, or for copyediting.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;We are editors of bioethics and humanities journals who have been contemplating the implications of this ongoing transformation. We believe that generative AI may pose a threat to the goals that animate our work but could also be valuable for achieving those goals. We do not pretend to have resolved the many social questions that we think generative AI raises for scholarly publishing, but in the interest of fostering a wider conversation about these questions, we have developed a preliminary set of recommendations about generative AI in scholarly publishing. We hope that the recommendations and rationales set out here will help the scholarly community navigate toward a deeper understanding of the strengths, limits, and challenges of AI for responsible scholarly work.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The stance set out here is consistent with those taken by the Committee on Publishing Ethics and many journal publishers, including those that publish or provide publishing services to the journals we edit. Previous position statements have addressed concerns about the use of AI for peer review and the importance of reviewers revealing to authors if they used AI in their review.5 However, to our knowledge, none have addressed the importance of using human reviewers to review manuscripts and editors retaining final decisions over what reviewers to select. Our stance differs from the position of &lt;i&gt;Science&lt;/i&gt; magazine, which holds not only that a generative AI tool cannot be an author but also that “text generated by ChatGPT (or any other AI tools) cannot be used in the work, nor can figures, images, or graphics be the products of such tools.”6 Such a proscription is too broad and may be impossible to enforce, in our view. Yet we recognize that the ethical issues raised by generative AI are complex, and we have struggled to decide how editors should promote responsible use of these technologies. Over time, we hope, the community of scholars will develop professional norms about the appropriate ways of using these new tools. Reviewers and readers, not just editors, will h","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":"23 4","pages":"296-299"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dewb.12424","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41156134","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
A Sino-African perspective and the morality of procreation 中非视角与生育道德。
IF 0.9 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Pub Date : 2023-09-25 DOI: 10.1111/dewb.12425
Luís Cordeiro-Rodrigues, Qingjuan Sun, Aribiah David Attoe, Cornelius Ewuoso

Current studies of anti/-natalism have been carried out mainly in the context of western philosophy. In this article, we offer a pro-natalist view based on Confucian and Afro-communitarian philosophy (Sino-African ethics). Grounded in this Sino-African perspective, we uphold that there is, at least, one reason to believe that not only is it morally permissible to procreate, but also that on some occasions, procreating is what morality prescribes. Specifically, we contend that, from a Sino-African perspective, procreating sometimes is the best way to fulfil duties of reciprocity and care towards our parents.

目前反出生论的研究主要是在西方哲学的背景下进行的。在这篇文章中,我们提出了一个基于儒家和非洲共同体哲学(中非伦理学)的赞成者观点。基于这种中非视角,我们坚持认为,至少有一个理由相信,生育不仅在道德上是允许的,而且在某些情况下,生育是道德规定的。具体而言,我们认为,从中非的角度来看,生育有时是履行互惠义务和照顾父母的最佳方式。
{"title":"A Sino-African perspective and the morality of procreation","authors":"Luís Cordeiro-Rodrigues,&nbsp;Qingjuan Sun,&nbsp;Aribiah David Attoe,&nbsp;Cornelius Ewuoso","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12425","DOIUrl":"10.1111/dewb.12425","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Current studies of anti/-natalism have been carried out mainly in the context of western philosophy. In this article, we offer a pro-natalist view based on Confucian and Afro-communitarian philosophy (Sino-African ethics). Grounded in this Sino-African perspective, we uphold that there is, at least, one reason to believe that not only is it morally permissible to procreate, but also that on some occasions, procreating is what morality prescribes. Specifically, we contend that, from a Sino-African perspective, procreating sometimes is the best way to fulfil duties of reciprocity and care towards our parents.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":"24 4","pages":"273-283"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41180414","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Frozen and forgotten: What are South African fertility clinics to do with surplus cryopreserved embryos once their patients lose interest? 冷冻和遗忘:一旦病人失去兴趣,南非的生育诊所将如何处理多余的冷冻胚胎?
IF 0.9 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Pub Date : 2023-08-24 DOI: 10.1111/dewb.12422
Donrich W. Thaldar, Aliki Edgcumbe

As is the case around the globe, South African fertility clinics face an ever-expanding problem: what to do with the growing number of surplus cryopreserved embryos. Fertility clinics remain hesitant to destroy these abandoned embryos, partly because of concerns about the legal ramifications. This article clarifies the legal position in South Africa and offers practical recommendations to assist fertility clinics in managing abandoned embryos. In sum, fertility clinics cannot deem embryos as abandoned and discard them if fertility patients fail to respond to a notice that the embryo storage agreement is about to expire. However, if there is non-payment for embryo storage by fertility patients and the fertility clinic has informed the fertility patients of other options available to them with respect to their embryos, and there is still no response, the fertility clinic is legally entitled – and legally obliged – to discard the embryos.

就像世界各地的情况一样,南非的生育诊所面临着一个日益扩大的问题:如何处理越来越多的多余冷冻胚胎。生育诊所仍然对销毁这些被遗弃的胚胎犹豫不决,部分原因是担心法律后果。本文阐明了南非的法律立场,并提供了实用的建议,以协助生育诊所管理遗弃胚胎。总而言之,如果不孕患者不回应胚胎储存协议即将到期的通知,生育诊所不能将胚胎视为遗弃并丢弃。但是,如果不孕不育患者没有支付胚胎储存费用,生育诊所已经告知不孕不育患者关于其胚胎的其他选择,但仍然没有回应,那么生育诊所在法律上有权- -并且在法律上有义务- -丢弃胚胎。
{"title":"Frozen and forgotten: What are South African fertility clinics to do with surplus cryopreserved embryos once their patients lose interest?","authors":"Donrich W. Thaldar,&nbsp;Aliki Edgcumbe","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12422","DOIUrl":"10.1111/dewb.12422","url":null,"abstract":"<p>As is the case around the globe, South African fertility clinics face an ever-expanding problem: what to do with the growing number of surplus cryopreserved embryos. Fertility clinics remain hesitant to destroy these abandoned embryos, partly because of concerns about the legal ramifications. This article clarifies the legal position in South Africa and offers practical recommendations to assist fertility clinics in managing abandoned embryos. In sum, fertility clinics cannot deem embryos as abandoned and discard them if fertility patients fail to respond to a notice that the embryo storage agreement is about to expire. However, if there is non-payment for embryo storage by fertility patients and the fertility clinic has informed the fertility patients of other options available to them with respect to their embryos, and there is still no response, the fertility clinic is legally entitled – and legally obliged – to discard the embryos.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":"24 4","pages":"268-272"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11626995/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10435117","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The ASGLOS Study: A global survey on how predatory journals affect scientific practice ASGLOS 研究:关于掠夺性期刊如何影响科学实践的全球调查。
IF 0.9 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Pub Date : 2023-08-16 DOI: 10.1111/dewb.12421
Alessandro Martinino, Oshin Puri, Juan Pablo Scarano Pereira, Eloise Owen, Surobhi Chatterjee, Mohamed Abouelazayem, Wah Yang, Francesk Mulita, Yitka Graham, Chetan Parmar, Dharmanand Ramnarain, Arda Isik, Shruti Yadav, Bhargavi R. Budihal, Shankarsai Kashyap, Mohammad Aloulou, Mrinmoy Kundu, Arturan Ibrahimli, Eshwar Rajesh, Reewen George D. Silva, Gaurang Bhatt, Kashish Malhotra, Riccardo Magnani, Frank W. J. M. Smeenk, Sjaak Pouwels

Predatory journals and conferences are an emerging problem in scientific literature as they have financial motives, without guaranteeing scientific quality and exposure. The main objective of the ASGLOS project is to investigate the predatory e-email characteristics, management, and possible consequences and to analyse the extent of the current problem at each academic level. To collect the personal experiences of physicians’ mailboxes on predatory publishing, a Google Form® survey was designed and disseminated from September 2021 to April 2022. A total of 978 responses were analysed from 58 countries around the world. A total of 64.8% of participants indicated the need for 3 or fewer emails to acquire a criticality view in distinguishing a real invitation from a spam, while 11.5% still have doubt regardless of how many emails they get. The AGLOS Study clearly highlights the problem of academic e-mail spam by predatory journals and conferences. Our findings signify the importance of providing academic career-oriented advice and organising training sessions to increase awareness of predatory publishing for those conducting scientific research.

掠夺性期刊和会议是科学文献中一个新出现的问题,因为它们有经济动机,却不保证科学质量和曝光率。ASGLOS 项目的主要目标是调查掠夺性电子邮箱的特点、管理和可能的后果,并分析目前各学术层次问题的严重程度。为了收集医生邮箱中关于掠夺性发布的个人经历,我们设计了一份 Google Form® 调查表,并在 2021 年 9 月至 2022 年 4 月期间分发。共分析了来自全球 58 个国家的 978 份回复。共有 64.8%的参与者表示,需要 3 封或更少的邮件才能获得区分真实邀请和垃圾邮件的临界视角,而 11.5%的参与者无论收到多少封电子邮件都仍心存疑虑。AGLOS 研究清楚地凸显了掠夺性期刊和会议的学术垃圾邮件问题。我们的研究结果表明,为从事科学研究的人员提供以学术职业为导向的建议并组织培训课程以提高他们对掠夺性出版的认识非常重要。
{"title":"The ASGLOS Study: A global survey on how predatory journals affect scientific practice","authors":"Alessandro Martinino,&nbsp;Oshin Puri,&nbsp;Juan Pablo Scarano Pereira,&nbsp;Eloise Owen,&nbsp;Surobhi Chatterjee,&nbsp;Mohamed Abouelazayem,&nbsp;Wah Yang,&nbsp;Francesk Mulita,&nbsp;Yitka Graham,&nbsp;Chetan Parmar,&nbsp;Dharmanand Ramnarain,&nbsp;Arda Isik,&nbsp;Shruti Yadav,&nbsp;Bhargavi R. Budihal,&nbsp;Shankarsai Kashyap,&nbsp;Mohammad Aloulou,&nbsp;Mrinmoy Kundu,&nbsp;Arturan Ibrahimli,&nbsp;Eshwar Rajesh,&nbsp;Reewen George D. Silva,&nbsp;Gaurang Bhatt,&nbsp;Kashish Malhotra,&nbsp;Riccardo Magnani,&nbsp;Frank W. J. M. Smeenk,&nbsp;Sjaak Pouwels","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12421","DOIUrl":"10.1111/dewb.12421","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Predatory journals and conferences are an emerging problem in scientific literature as they have financial motives, without guaranteeing scientific quality and exposure. The main objective of the ASGLOS project is to investigate the predatory e-email characteristics, management, and possible consequences and to analyse the extent of the current problem at each academic level. To collect the personal experiences of physicians’ mailboxes on predatory publishing, a Google Form® survey was designed and disseminated from September 2021 to April 2022. A total of 978 responses were analysed from 58 countries around the world. A total of 64.8% of participants indicated the need for 3 or fewer emails to acquire a criticality view in distinguishing a real invitation from a spam, while 11.5% still have doubt regardless of how many emails they get. The AGLOS Study clearly highlights the problem of academic e-mail spam by predatory journals and conferences. Our findings signify the importance of providing academic career-oriented advice and organising training sessions to increase awareness of predatory publishing for those conducting scientific research.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":"24 3","pages":"207-216"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10125966","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Oocyte cryopreservation for non-medical reasons: Ethical and regulatory concerns in China 非医学原因的卵母细胞冷冻:中国的伦理和监管问题。
IF 0.9 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Pub Date : 2023-08-09 DOI: 10.1111/dewb.12418
Yu Lanyi, Zhai Xiaomei PhD

Assisted reproductive technology is a complex medical intervention with many potential social sensitivities. Within this domain, oocyte cryopreservation has emerged as an important research area for preserving female fertility. Against the backdrop of the hotly debated first legal case in China of a single woman wishing to freeze her eggs, and the implementation of the ‘three-child policy’ in China, there is an urgent need to evaluate policies and address ethical considerations surrounding oocyte cryopreservation for non-medical reasons. This review examines current policies, explores China's practices and research, and examines the latest ethical challenges surrounding non-medical oocyte cryopreservation. It develops strategies and recommendations that will be relevant in China and other developing countries seeking to navigate this complex landscape.

辅助生殖技术是一项复杂的医疗干预措施,具有许多潜在的社会敏感性。在这一领域,卵细胞冷冻保存已成为保存女性生育能力的一个重要研究领域。在中国发生了首例单身女性希望冷冻卵子的法律案件并引发激烈争论,以及中国实施 "三胎政策 "的背景下,迫切需要对相关政策进行评估,并解决与非医疗原因的卵母细胞冷冻相关的伦理问题。本综述研究了当前的政策,探讨了中国的实践和研究,并研究了围绕非医疗性卵母细胞冷冻的最新伦理挑战。它为中国和其他发展中国家在这一复杂的环境中寻求发展提出了相关的策略和建议。
{"title":"Oocyte cryopreservation for non-medical reasons: Ethical and regulatory concerns in China","authors":"Yu Lanyi,&nbsp;Zhai Xiaomei PhD","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12418","DOIUrl":"10.1111/dewb.12418","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Assisted reproductive technology is a complex medical intervention with many potential social sensitivities. Within this domain, oocyte cryopreservation has emerged as an important research area for preserving female fertility. Against the backdrop of the hotly debated first legal case in China of a single woman wishing to freeze her eggs, and the implementation of the ‘three-child policy’ in China, there is an urgent need to evaluate policies and address ethical considerations surrounding oocyte cryopreservation for non-medical reasons. This review examines current policies, explores China's practices and research, and examines the latest ethical challenges surrounding non-medical oocyte cryopreservation. It develops strategies and recommendations that will be relevant in China and other developing countries seeking to navigate this complex landscape.</p>","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":"24 3","pages":"198-206"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9957938","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
When medical professionalism and culture or the law collide: Gay patients in homophobic societies 当医疗专业与文化或法律发生冲突:同性恋恐惧症社会中的同性恋患者
IF 2.2 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Pub Date : 2023-08-08 DOI: 10.1111/dewb.12420
Udo Schuklenk
<p>Medical professionalism faces serious challenges in homophobic societies. A case in point: Uganda. The country has gained global notoriety for having implemented one of the toughest anti-LGBTQ laws in the world. It includes the death penalty for something called ‘aggravated homosexuality’, as well as a 20-year prison sentence for ‘promoting’ homosexuality.1</p><p>When issuing a different, less draconian anti-gay legislation some years back, the country's health minister assured Ugandans, as well as the international community, that all people, regardless of sexual orientation, would receive ‘full treatment’ and added that ‘health workers will live up to their ethics of keeping confidentiality of their patients’.2 Gay patients experienced a quite different reality. In 2017 the activist group <i>Sexual Minorities Uganda</i> issued a report under the title <i>‘Even if they spit at you, don't be surprised</i>’.3 I recommend the document to your attention. It's replete with first-person accounts of unprofessional conduct by health care professionals. It ranges from the use of derogatory language to refusal of service provision to actual physical attacks. There is also evidence of medical school training containing scientific misinformation on homosexuality.</p><p>While unusual by today's global standards, Uganda isn't the only country with anti-gay legislation on its books. Less draconian legislation can be found in homophobic societies like Jamaica, for instance. There is a high number of former British colonies with such laws, but it's unclear whether that's mere correlation or whether there is a causation-type relationship. While the legislation in place oftentimes is a relic of colonial era laws, there also appears to be widespread societal support for such measures in these predominantly Christian societies. While some Caribbean nations have recently decriminalized consensual same-sex relations, six Caribbean countries, among them larger countries like Jamaica, still criminalise consensual same-sex sexual relations. They are not alone, some 66 countries reportedly criminalise consensual same-sex relations.4 The World Medical Association saw it fit, against this background, to issue a strong statement condemning the participation of medical professionals in anal examinations ostensibly designed to assist in determinations of same-sex sexual activities.5 Apparently such examinations actually happen in certain societies, even though they are based on humbug science.6</p><p>This raises a number of important issues regarding the health care that patients who identify as gay or queer, or who participate in same-sex sexual relations, can reasonably expect in such societies. The uncontroversial objective of health care provision is to increase or maximise the number of life-years a person can live with a good quality of life that makes their life worth living, in their own considered judgment. Health care professionals value judgments about the lifest
在恐同社会,医疗专业精神面临严峻挑战。乌干达就是一个很好的例子。该国因实施了世界上最严厉的反lgbtq法律之一而享誉全球。它包括对所谓的“严重同性恋”的死刑,以及对“促进”同性恋的20年监禁。几年前,乌干达卫生部长颁布了一项不同的、不那么严厉的反同性恋立法,当时他向乌干达人民以及国际社会保证,所有人,无论性取向如何,都将得到“充分的治疗”,并补充说,“卫生工作者将遵守为病人保密的道德规范”同性恋患者经历了一个完全不同的现实。2017年,乌干达性少数群体活动组织发布了一份题为“即使他们向你吐口水,也不要感到惊讶”的报告我建议你注意这份文件。书中充斥着医疗专业人员不专业行为的第一人称描述。它的范围从使用贬损的语言到拒绝提供服务,再到实际的人身攻击。也有证据表明,医学院的培训中包含有关同性恋的科学错误信息。虽然以今天的全球标准来看,这是不寻常的,但乌干达并不是唯一一个有反同性恋立法的国家。例如,在牙买加这样的恐同社会,可以找到不那么严厉的立法。有很多前英国殖民地都有这样的法律,但尚不清楚这是单纯的相关性还是因果关系。虽然立法往往是殖民时代法律的遗迹,但在这些以基督教为主的社会中,这些措施似乎也得到了广泛的社会支持。虽然一些加勒比国家最近将双方同意的同性关系合法化,但六个加勒比国家,其中包括牙买加这样的大国,仍然将双方同意的同性性关系定为犯罪。他们并不孤单,据报道,大约有66个国家将双方同意的同性关系定为犯罪在此背景下,世界医学协会认为有必要发表一项强烈声明,谴责医学专业人员参与表面上旨在协助确定同性性活动的肛门检查显然,这样的考试在某些社会中确实存在,尽管它们是基于骗人的科学。这就提出了一些重要的问题,关于那些认为自己是同性恋或同性恋的病人,或者那些参与同性性关系的病人,在这样的社会中可以合理地期望得到的医疗保健。医疗保健提供的无可争议的目标是增加或最大限度地延长一个人能够以良好的生活质量生活的生命年数,使他们的生活有价值,根据他们自己的考虑判断。卫生保健专业人员重视对患者生活方式的判断,不应影响他们得到的护理;其他任何行为都可能构成不专业行为,因为这可能对提供保健服务产生负面影响。顺便说一句,这句话不仅对-à-vis酷儿患者是正确的,对所有患者都是正确的。例如,超重病人长期以来一直抱怨卫生保健环境中体重歧视的影响,以及这种歧视对他们所接受的卫生保健质量的有害影响类似的问题也出现在“难相处的病人”身上卫生保健专业人员的隐性偏见已被证明会增加健康差异其中一个显而易见的解决方案是敏感性培训,即假定医疗保健专业人员在意识到自己的偏见后,会主动监控自己,以确保他们的偏见不会影响他们提供的医疗保健。当然,如果乌干达的医疗保健专业人员的偏见导致他们对同性恋患者进行身体攻击,人们不得不怀疑这种培训是否会对专业行为产生重大影响,但这可能值得一试。响应性卫生保健系统可以实施的另一项措施是,增加那些受到内隐偏见负面影响的群体的专业人员数量。显然,如果有的话,这些解决方案中只有第一种有机会在世界乌干达取得成功。当局需要确保,不管他们对酷儿人群有多鄙视,这些患者都能获得医疗保健。例如,乌干达医学协会也有责任确保其成员的专业行为。该组织在其网站上宣称,它提倡“尽可能高的医学道德标准,并为医生提供道德指导”。它的愿景是:“乌干达所有人都能获得高质量的健康和保健服务”这当然包括乌干达的同性恋患者。 碰巧,乌干达医学协会也是世界医学协会的组成成员。世界医学协会公开谴责乌干达的反同性恋立法,并呼吁其组成成员也这样做医学专业精神和专业人士对酷儿患者的偏见是不相容的。今天,那些歧视性少数群体的人倾向于以尊重文化多样性为借口,为他们侵犯人权的行为辩护,但这在我们正在考虑的情况下是行不通的,因为病人把专业人士看作是他们的专业角色,而不是普通公民。专业价值观决定了专业咨询过程中的正确行为,而不是特殊的个人价值观,无论它们在社会上多么普遍。专业协会有责任履行他们对社会做出的承诺,并对那些达不到专业要求的成员进行纪律处分。偏见、文化、甚至歧视性法律都不能成为专业人员个人偏见造成的次优保健服务的理由,即使这些偏见在其特定文化中广泛存在。
{"title":"When medical professionalism and culture or the law collide: Gay patients in homophobic societies","authors":"Udo Schuklenk","doi":"10.1111/dewb.12420","DOIUrl":"10.1111/dewb.12420","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;Medical professionalism faces serious challenges in homophobic societies. A case in point: Uganda. The country has gained global notoriety for having implemented one of the toughest anti-LGBTQ laws in the world. It includes the death penalty for something called ‘aggravated homosexuality’, as well as a 20-year prison sentence for ‘promoting’ homosexuality.1&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;When issuing a different, less draconian anti-gay legislation some years back, the country's health minister assured Ugandans, as well as the international community, that all people, regardless of sexual orientation, would receive ‘full treatment’ and added that ‘health workers will live up to their ethics of keeping confidentiality of their patients’.2 Gay patients experienced a quite different reality. In 2017 the activist group &lt;i&gt;Sexual Minorities Uganda&lt;/i&gt; issued a report under the title &lt;i&gt;‘Even if they spit at you, don't be surprised&lt;/i&gt;’.3 I recommend the document to your attention. It's replete with first-person accounts of unprofessional conduct by health care professionals. It ranges from the use of derogatory language to refusal of service provision to actual physical attacks. There is also evidence of medical school training containing scientific misinformation on homosexuality.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;While unusual by today's global standards, Uganda isn't the only country with anti-gay legislation on its books. Less draconian legislation can be found in homophobic societies like Jamaica, for instance. There is a high number of former British colonies with such laws, but it's unclear whether that's mere correlation or whether there is a causation-type relationship. While the legislation in place oftentimes is a relic of colonial era laws, there also appears to be widespread societal support for such measures in these predominantly Christian societies. While some Caribbean nations have recently decriminalized consensual same-sex relations, six Caribbean countries, among them larger countries like Jamaica, still criminalise consensual same-sex sexual relations. They are not alone, some 66 countries reportedly criminalise consensual same-sex relations.4 The World Medical Association saw it fit, against this background, to issue a strong statement condemning the participation of medical professionals in anal examinations ostensibly designed to assist in determinations of same-sex sexual activities.5 Apparently such examinations actually happen in certain societies, even though they are based on humbug science.6&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This raises a number of important issues regarding the health care that patients who identify as gay or queer, or who participate in same-sex sexual relations, can reasonably expect in such societies. The uncontroversial objective of health care provision is to increase or maximise the number of life-years a person can live with a good quality of life that makes their life worth living, in their own considered judgment. Health care professionals value judgments about the lifest","PeriodicalId":50590,"journal":{"name":"Developing World Bioethics","volume":"23 3","pages":"199-200"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dewb.12420","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10555773","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Developing World Bioethics
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1