{"title":"社区水氟化伦理:第2部分-如何在文献中评价社区水氟化伦理?范围审查","authors":"Bhavini Patel, Thomas Anthony Dyer","doi":"10.1038/s41415-024-8057-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim To examine how the ethics of community water fluoridation has been appraised in the literature. Method A scoping review using an updated Arksey and O''Malley framework. Six electronic databases were searched: Medline via OVID; Scopus; Web of Science; Cochrane Library; StarPlus and Google Scholar. Grey literature and reference lists of included studies were also searched. Results In total, 51 studies from 15 countries were included. Many referred to biomedical ethical principles intended for clinical rather than public health interventions. Some primarily aimed to appraise its ethics whereas others considered it as part of more general discussions on fluoridation. While most acknowledged its complexity, those more supportive of fluoridation often emphasised collective benefit and those less supportive emphasised infringement of autonomy or personal liberty and concerns about harm. Few referred to public health ethics principles and frameworks available in the literature. Conclusion Different approaches have been taken to appraise the ethics of fluoridation. Frequently, these were conceived for individual medical rather than public health interventions and are inadequate to resolve tension between inevitable infringement of individual consent and collective benefit in public health. Other approaches conceived specifically for public health exist that have more utility in debates and ethical decision-making.","PeriodicalId":9229,"journal":{"name":"British Dental Journal","volume":"238 5","pages":"336-343"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41415-024-8057-5.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The ethics of community water fluoridation: Part 2 - how has the ethics of community water fluoridation been appraised in the literature? A scoping review\",\"authors\":\"Bhavini Patel, Thomas Anthony Dyer\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41415-024-8057-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim To examine how the ethics of community water fluoridation has been appraised in the literature. Method A scoping review using an updated Arksey and O''Malley framework. Six electronic databases were searched: Medline via OVID; Scopus; Web of Science; Cochrane Library; StarPlus and Google Scholar. Grey literature and reference lists of included studies were also searched. Results In total, 51 studies from 15 countries were included. Many referred to biomedical ethical principles intended for clinical rather than public health interventions. Some primarily aimed to appraise its ethics whereas others considered it as part of more general discussions on fluoridation. While most acknowledged its complexity, those more supportive of fluoridation often emphasised collective benefit and those less supportive emphasised infringement of autonomy or personal liberty and concerns about harm. Few referred to public health ethics principles and frameworks available in the literature. Conclusion Different approaches have been taken to appraise the ethics of fluoridation. Frequently, these were conceived for individual medical rather than public health interventions and are inadequate to resolve tension between inevitable infringement of individual consent and collective benefit in public health. Other approaches conceived specifically for public health exist that have more utility in debates and ethical decision-making.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9229,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Dental Journal\",\"volume\":\"238 5\",\"pages\":\"336-343\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41415-024-8057-5.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Dental Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41415-024-8057-5\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Dental Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41415-024-8057-5","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的探讨文献中对社区饮水氟化的伦理评价。方法使用更新的Arksey和O“Malley框架进行范围审查。检索了6个电子数据库:Medline via OVID;斯高帕斯;Web of Science;Cochrane图书馆;StarPlus和谷歌Scholar。还检索了纳入研究的灰色文献和参考文献列表。结果共纳入来自15个国家的51项研究。许多人提到了用于临床而非公共卫生干预的生物医学伦理原则。一些人的主要目的是评价其伦理性,而另一些人则认为它是关于氟化的更广泛讨论的一部分。虽然大多数人承认氟化的复杂性,但那些更支持氟化的人往往强调集体利益,而那些不太支持的人则强调侵犯自主权或个人自由以及对伤害的担忧。很少有人提到文献中现有的公共卫生伦理原则和框架。结论对氟化的伦理评价方法不同。这些措施往往是为个人医疗干预而非公共卫生干预而制定的,不足以解决公共卫生中不可避免的侵犯个人同意与集体利益之间的紧张关系。其他专门为公共卫生设想的方法在辩论和伦理决策中更有用处。
The ethics of community water fluoridation: Part 2 - how has the ethics of community water fluoridation been appraised in the literature? A scoping review
Aim To examine how the ethics of community water fluoridation has been appraised in the literature. Method A scoping review using an updated Arksey and O''Malley framework. Six electronic databases were searched: Medline via OVID; Scopus; Web of Science; Cochrane Library; StarPlus and Google Scholar. Grey literature and reference lists of included studies were also searched. Results In total, 51 studies from 15 countries were included. Many referred to biomedical ethical principles intended for clinical rather than public health interventions. Some primarily aimed to appraise its ethics whereas others considered it as part of more general discussions on fluoridation. While most acknowledged its complexity, those more supportive of fluoridation often emphasised collective benefit and those less supportive emphasised infringement of autonomy or personal liberty and concerns about harm. Few referred to public health ethics principles and frameworks available in the literature. Conclusion Different approaches have been taken to appraise the ethics of fluoridation. Frequently, these were conceived for individual medical rather than public health interventions and are inadequate to resolve tension between inevitable infringement of individual consent and collective benefit in public health. Other approaches conceived specifically for public health exist that have more utility in debates and ethical decision-making.
期刊介绍:
The role of the BDJ is to inform its readers of ideas, opinions, developments and key issues in dentistry - clinical, practical and scientific - stimulating interest, debate and discussion amongst dentists of all disciplines. All papers published in the BDJ are subject to rigorous peer review.