鸿沟如此之大:公众对人类基因组编辑在美国医疗保健系统中的作用的看法。

IF 3.5 2区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION Public Understanding of Science Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-28 DOI:10.1177/09636625231189955
John P Nelson, David C Tomblin, Avery Barbera, Melissa Smallwood
{"title":"鸿沟如此之大:公众对人类基因组编辑在美国医疗保健系统中的作用的看法。","authors":"John P Nelson, David C Tomblin, Avery Barbera, Melissa Smallwood","doi":"10.1177/09636625231189955","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We report findings from two open-framed focus groups eliciting informed public opinion about the rapidly developing technology of human genome editing in the context of the US healthcare system. Results reveal that participants take a dim view of the present healthcare system, articulating extensive concerns about the accessibility and affordability of care. They feel that, unless these problems are resolved, they stand little chance of benefiting from any eventual human genome editing treatments. They prioritize improvement in healthcare access well above human genome editing development, and human genome editing regulation and oversight above human genome editing research. These results reveal substantial divergence between public perspectives and expert discourse on human genome editing. The latter attends primarily to the moral permissibility of technical categories of human genome editing research and how to treat human genome editing within existing regulatory and oversight systems rather than broader political-economic and healthcare access concerns. This divergence illustrates the importance of openly framed public engagement around emerging technologies.</p>","PeriodicalId":48094,"journal":{"name":"Public Understanding of Science","volume":" ","pages":"189-209"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The divide so wide: Public perspectives on the role of human genome editing in the US healthcare system.\",\"authors\":\"John P Nelson, David C Tomblin, Avery Barbera, Melissa Smallwood\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09636625231189955\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>We report findings from two open-framed focus groups eliciting informed public opinion about the rapidly developing technology of human genome editing in the context of the US healthcare system. Results reveal that participants take a dim view of the present healthcare system, articulating extensive concerns about the accessibility and affordability of care. They feel that, unless these problems are resolved, they stand little chance of benefiting from any eventual human genome editing treatments. They prioritize improvement in healthcare access well above human genome editing development, and human genome editing regulation and oversight above human genome editing research. These results reveal substantial divergence between public perspectives and expert discourse on human genome editing. The latter attends primarily to the moral permissibility of technical categories of human genome editing research and how to treat human genome editing within existing regulatory and oversight systems rather than broader political-economic and healthcare access concerns. This divergence illustrates the importance of openly framed public engagement around emerging technologies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48094,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Understanding of Science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"189-209\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Understanding of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625231189955\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Understanding of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625231189955","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们报告了两个开放式焦点小组的研究结果,这些小组就美国医疗保健系统中快速发展的人类基因组编辑技术征求了公众的意见。结果显示,参与者对目前的医疗保健系统持负面看法,对医疗保健的可及性和可负担性表示了广泛的担忧。他们认为,除非这些问题得到解决,否则他们几乎没有机会从任何最终的人类基因组编辑治疗中获益。他们把改善医疗服务的可及性放在人类基因组编辑开发之上,把人类基因组编辑的监管和监督放在人类基因组编辑研究之上。这些结果表明,在人类基因组编辑问题上,公众观点与专家论述之间存在巨大分歧。后者主要关注人类基因组编辑研究技术类别的道德允许性,以及如何在现有的监管和监督体系内处理人类基因组编辑问题,而不是更广泛的政治经济和医疗保健获取问题。这种分歧说明了围绕新兴技术进行公开的公众参与的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The divide so wide: Public perspectives on the role of human genome editing in the US healthcare system.

We report findings from two open-framed focus groups eliciting informed public opinion about the rapidly developing technology of human genome editing in the context of the US healthcare system. Results reveal that participants take a dim view of the present healthcare system, articulating extensive concerns about the accessibility and affordability of care. They feel that, unless these problems are resolved, they stand little chance of benefiting from any eventual human genome editing treatments. They prioritize improvement in healthcare access well above human genome editing development, and human genome editing regulation and oversight above human genome editing research. These results reveal substantial divergence between public perspectives and expert discourse on human genome editing. The latter attends primarily to the moral permissibility of technical categories of human genome editing research and how to treat human genome editing within existing regulatory and oversight systems rather than broader political-economic and healthcare access concerns. This divergence illustrates the importance of openly framed public engagement around emerging technologies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
9.80%
发文量
80
期刊介绍: Public Understanding of Science is a fully peer reviewed international journal covering all aspects of the inter-relationships between science (including technology and medicine) and the public. Public Understanding of Science is the only journal to cover all aspects of the inter-relationships between science (including technology and medicine) and the public. Topics Covered Include... ·surveys of public understanding and attitudes towards science and technology ·perceptions of science ·popular representations of science ·scientific and para-scientific belief systems ·science in schools
期刊最新文献
A different image? Images of scientists in Chinese films. Sociotechnical imaginaries of gene editing in food and agriculture: A comparative content analysis of mass media in the United States, New Zealand, Japan, the Netherlands, and Canada. The public you want, the public you get: Exploring the relationship between the public and science in the debate on xenotransplantation. Chinese scientists' mediated participation in public outreach: Multiple direct and personal norm-mediated predictors. Climate change by any other name: Social representations and language practices of coastal inhabitants on Mayotte Island in the Indian Ocean.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
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
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
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
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