32 found
Order:
  1.  29
    Two Minds, One Patient: Clearing up Confusion About “Ambivalence”.Bryanna Moore, Ryan H. Nelson, Peter A. Ubel & Jennifer Blumenthal-Barby - 2021 - American Journal of Bioethics 22 (6):37-47.
    Patients who experience difficulty making medical decisions are often referred to as “ambivalent.” However, the current lack of attention to the nuances between a cluster of phenomena that resemble...
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  2.  16
    What Do Psychiatrists Think About Caring for Patients Who Have Extremely Treatment-Refractory Illness?Natalie J. Dorfman, Jennifer Blumenthal-Barby, Peter A. Ubel, Bryanna Moore, Ryan Nelson & Brent M. Kious - 2024 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 15 (1):51-58.
    Questions about when to limit unhelpful treatments are often raised in general medicine but are less commonly considered in psychiatry. Here we describe a survey of U.S. psychiatrists intended to characterize their attitudes about the management of suicidal ideation in patients with severely treatment-refractory illness. Respondents (n = 212) received one of two cases describing a patient with suicidal ideation due to either borderline personality disorder or major depressive disorder. Both patients were described as receiving all guideline-based and plausible emerging (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  3.  37
    In Defense of “Denial”: Difficulty Knowing When Beliefs Are Unrealistic and Whether Unrealistic Beliefs Are Bad.J. S. Blumenthal-Barby & Peter A. Ubel - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (9):4-15.
    Bioethicists often draw sharp distinctions between hope and states like denial, self-deception, and unrealistic optimism. But what, exactly, is the difference between hope and its more suspect cousins? One common way of drawing the distinction focuses on accuracy of belief about the desired outcome: Hope, though perhaps sometimes misplaced, does not involve inaccuracy in the way that these other states do. Because inaccurate beliefs are thought to compromise informed decision making, bioethicists have considered these states to be ones where intervention (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  4.  24
    Empowerment Failure: How Shortcomings in Physician Communication Unwittingly Undermine Patient Autonomy.Peter A. Ubel, Karen A. Scherr & Angela Fagerlin - 2017 - American Journal of Bioethics 17 (11):31-39.
    Many health care decisions depend not only upon medical facts, but also on value judgments—patient goals and preferences. Until recent decades, patients relied on doctors to tell them what to do. Then ethicists and others convinced clinicians to adopt a paradigm shift in medical practice, to recognize patient autonomy, by orienting decision making toward the unique goals of individual patients. Unfortunately, current medical practice often falls short of empowering patients. In this article, we reflect on whether the current state of (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  5.  52
    Lying to Insurance Companies: The Desire to Deceive among Physicians and the Public.Rachel M. Werner, G. Caleb Alexander, Angela Fagerlin & Peter A. Ubel - 2004 - American Journal of Bioethics 4 (4):53-59.
    This study examines the public's and physicians' willingness to support deception of insurance companies in order to obtain necessary healthcare services and how this support varies based on perceptions of physicians' time pressures. Based on surveys of 700 prospective jurors and 1617 physicians, the public was more than twice as likely as physicians to sanction deception (26% versus 11%) and half as likely to believe that physicians have adequate time to appeal coverage decisions (22% versus 59%). The odds of public (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  6.  14
    Why It's Not Time for Health Care Rationing.Peter A. Ubel - 2015 - Hastings Center Report 45 (2):15-19.
    In the last few years, the U.S. health care system has seemingly been gripped by “back to the nineties” fever. But there is a notable change in professional debates about how to better control health care costs. Discussion of health care rationing, which was hotly debated in the nineties, has become much more muted.Is health care rationing passé? I contend that debates about health care rationing have waned not because the need to ration has dwindled nor because ethical debates about (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  7.  27
    Social acceptability, personal responsibility, and prognosis in public judgments and transplant allocation.Peter A. Ubel, Jonathan Baron & David A. Asch - 1999 - Bioethics 13 (1):57–68.
    Background: Some members of the general public feel that patients who cause their own organ failure through smoking, alcohol use, or drug use should not receive equal priority for scarce transplantable organs. This may reflect a belief that these patients (1) cause their own illness, (2) have poor transplant prognoses or, (3) are simply unworthy. We explore the role that social acceptability, personal responsibility, and prognosis play in people's judgments about transplant allocation. Methods: By random allocation, we presented 283 prospective (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  8.  27
    Behavioral Equipoise: A Way to Resolve Ethical Stalemates in Clinical Research.Robert Silbergleit & Peter A. Ubel - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (2):1-8.
    Randomized trials depend on clinicians feeling that they are morally justified in allowing their patients to be randomized across treatment arms. Typically such justification rides on what has been called “clinical equipoise”—when there is disagreement of opinion among the community of experts about whether one treatment is better than another, then physicians can ethically enter their patients into a clinical trial, even if individual physicians are not at equipoise. Recent debates over prominent studies, however, illustrate that controversy can be easily (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  9.  26
    Autonomy: What's Shared Decision Making Have to Do With It?Peter A. Ubel, Karen A. Scherr & Angela Fagerlin - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (2):11-12.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  10.  7
    Paying the Right Amount to Challenge Trial Participants – We Need to Use Behavioral Science Insights to Sell What’s Right.Peter A. Ubel & J. S. Blumenthal-Barby - 2021 - American Journal of Bioethics 21 (3):38-39.
    Sometimes doing what’s right depends on anticipating how people will react when you do the right thing. Consider two aspects of challenge trial payments discussed by Lynch and colleagues. Th...
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  11.  11
    Supported Decision Making: A Concept at the Margins vs. Center of Autonomy?Peter A. Ubel & Jennifer Blumenthal-Barby - 2021 - American Journal of Bioethics 21 (11):43-44.
    In their article, “Supported Decision Making with People at the Margins of Autonomy,” Peterson, Karlawish, and Largent point to the fact that the concept of ‘supported decision-making’ has recently...
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  12.  14
    Solid-organ transplantation in HIV-infected patients.Scott D. Halpern, Peter A. Ubel & Arthur L. Caplan - forthcoming - Center for Bioethics Papers.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  13.  40
    AJOB Empirical Bioethics: A Home for Empirical Bioethics Scholarship.Chris Feudtner, Jeremy Sugarman, Barbara A. Koenig, Peter A. Ubel, Richard F. Ittenbach, Laura Weiss Roberts & Laurence B. McCullough - 2014 - AJOB Empirical Bioethics 5 (1):1-2.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  14.  19
    In Defense of Nudging When the Stakes Are High.Monica E. Lemmon & Peter A. Ubel - 2019 - American Journal of Bioethics 19 (5):62-63.
    Volume 19, Issue 5, May 2019, Page 62-63.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  15.  19
    Response to Open Peer Commentaries on ‘‘In Defense of ‘Denial’: Difficulty Knowing When Beliefs Are Unrealistic and Whether Unrealistic Beliefs Are Bad”.J. S. Blumenthal-Barby & Peter A. Ubel - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (9):3-5.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  16.  32
    Truth be told: not all nudging is bullshit.Jennifer Blumenthal-Barby & Peter A. Ubel - 2018 - Journal of Medical Ethics 44 (8):547-547.
    > ‘The fact about himself that the bullshitter hides, on the other hand, is that the truth-values of his statements are of no central interest to him; what we are not to understand is that his intention is neither to report the truth nor conceal it. It is just this lack of connection to a concern with truth—this indifference to how things really are—that is the essence of bullshit.’1 > —Harry Frankfurt In his paper, Nudging, informed consent, and bullshit, William (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  17.  35
    Gunmen and Ice Cream Cones: Harm to Autonomy and Harm to Persons.J. S. Blumenthal-Barby & Peter A. Ubel - 2016 - American Journal of Bioethics 16 (11):13-14.
  18.  10
    Agency Is Messy: Get Used to It.Peter A. Ubel - 2014 - American Journal of Bioethics 14 (9):37-38.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  19.  35
    The challenge of measuring community values in ways appropriate for setting health care priorities.Peter A. Ubel - 1999 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 9 (3):263-284.
    : The move from a notion that community values ought to play a role in health care decision making to the creation of health care policies that in some way reflect such values is a challenging one. No single method will adequately measure community values in a way appropriate for setting health care priorities. Consequently, multiple methods to measure community values should be employed, thereby allowing the strengths and weaknesses of the various methods to complement each other. A preliminary research (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  20.  8
    Definitely, Maybe: Helping Patients Make Decisions about Surgery When Prognosis Is Uncertain.Theresa Williamson, Peter A. Ubel, Christiana Oshotse, Jihad Abdelgadir & Taylor Mitchell - 2023 - Journal of Clinical Ethics 34 (2):169-174.
    The sudden onset of severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) is an event suffered by millions of individuals each year. Regardless of this frequency in occurrence, accurate prognostication remains difficult to achieve among physicians. There are many variables that affect this prognosis. Physicians are expected to assess the clinical indications of the brain injury while considering other factors such as patient quality of life, patient preferences, and environmental context. However, this lack of certainty in prognosis can ultimately affect treatment recommendations and (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21.  18
    Are Patients Willing to Participate in Medical Education?Peter A. Ubel & Ari Silver-Isenstadt - 2000 - Journal of Clinical Ethics 11 (3):230-235.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  22. another voice: The Experimental Imperative.Peter A. Ubel - forthcoming - Hastings Center Report.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. Commentary : how did we get into this mess?Peter A. Ubel - 2005 - In Don A. Moore (ed.), Conflicts of Interest: Challenges and Solutions in Business, Law, Medicine, and Public Policy. Cambridge University Press.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  24.  23
    Confessions of a bedside rationer: Commentary on Hurst and Danis.Peter A. Ubel - 2007 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 17 (3):267-269.
    : Samia Hurst and Marion Danis provide a thoughtful framework for how to judge the morality of bedside rationing decisions. In this commentary, I applaud Hurst and Danis for advancing the level of debate about bedside rationing. But when I attempt to apply the framework to my own clinical practice, I conclude that the framework comes up short.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25.  7
    How Did We Get into this Mess?Peter A. Ubel - 2005 - In Don A. Moore (ed.), Conflicts of Interest: Challenges and Solutions in Business, Law, Medicine, and Public Policy. Cambridge University Press. pp. 142.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26.  11
    Science and Behavior.Robert Silbergleit & Peter A. Ubel - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (2):W1 - W2.
    Randomized trials depend on clinicians feeling that they are morally justified in allowing their patients to be randomized across treatment arms. Typically such justification rides on what has been called “clinical equipoise”—when there is disagreement of opinion among the community of experts about whether one treatment is better than another, then physicians can ethically enter their patients into a clinical trial, even if individual physicians are not at equipoise. Recent debates over prominent studies, however, illustrate that controversy can be easily (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27.  10
    The Author Replies.Peter A. Ubel - 2015 - Hastings Center Report 45 (4):4-4.
    A response to “Rationing Is Still Rationing,” by Robert J. Wells.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28.  6
    The Experimental Imperative.Peter A. Ubel - 2011 - Hastings Center Report 41 (2):3-3.
  29.  14
    The Ethics of Swimming Pools.Peter A. Ubel - 2007 - Hastings Center Report 37 (4):51-55.
  30.  10
    The Predictable Irrationality of Righteous Minds, and the Work of Ethicists.Peter A. Ubel - 2013 - Hastings Center Report 43 (3):18-22.
    As Jonathan Haidt explains in The Righteous Mind, it is often our moral intuitions that come first, rapidly or even automatically, with ethical reasoning coming later. Haidt's book is one of many that have come out in recent years highlighting the relevance of psychology (and its close cousin, neuroscience) for understanding human morality. As a behavioral scientist, I have devoured many of these books. I am fascinated by human nature and love trying to understand why all of us behave and (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  31.  2
    Book Review of Spare Parts: Organ Replacement in American Society. [REVIEW]Peter A. Ubel - 1994 - Journal of Clinical Ethics 5 (2):171-171.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  32. Jonathan Baron and David A. Asch “A Report from the USA: Social Responsibility, Personal Responsibility, and Prognosis in Public Judgements About Transplant Allocation.”. [REVIEW]Peter A. Ubel & Arthur L. Caplan - 1999 - Bioethics 13:57-68.