The Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine is the official scientific publication of the Medical Ethics and History of Medicine of Tehran University of Medical Sciences. Physicians and health practitioners always deal with ethical issues in the treatment and management of diseases. The advent of new biomedical technologies further complicated the moral and societal issues of medical research and practice. Religious and cultural differences more emphasize the need for nationalizing this knowledge. The Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine (J Med Ethics Hist Med) is an opportunity for healthcare professionals as well as theologians, philosophers, and sociologists to present and discuss their ideas from several aspects in relation to medical ethics and bioethics. In addition, this Journal traces its roots to several aspects of the History of Medicine which further emphasizes on Iranian and Islamic eras.

Announcements

Current Issue

Vol 15 (2022)

Original Article(s)

  • XML | PDF | downloads: 147 | views: 458

    This study aims to assess the psychometric properties of the Persian version of the Attitudes Toward Plagiarism Questionnaire (ATPQ) among Iranian medical sciences postgraduate students and faculty members. In this study, the ATPQ developed by Mavrinac et al. in 2010 was translated into Persian. After assessment of face and content validity, we distributed the ATPQ draft among 286 Iranian medical science postgraduate students and faculty members. Explanatory and confirmatory factor analysis were applied, and Cronbach's alpha was used to measure the reliability of the ATPQ. All the items of our English version of the ATPQ were approved by the developer of the original ATPQ, and two were revised in the cognitive interview. Construct validity assessment showed that three items were not seriously involved in the extracted factors. The Persian version of the ATPQ had 26 items, five factors and a Cronbach's alpha of 0.81%, and the combined value explained 38.24% of the total variance of this scale. Two new factors of “perceived control” and “attitude toward self-plagiarism” were extracted and incorporated into the Persian version. To conclude, the ATPQ is a valid, reliable, and convenient instrument to determine attitudes toward plagiarism among Iranian medical science postgraduate students and faculty members.

  • XML | PDF | downloads: 93 | views: 440

    Media is an opportunity for health professionals; however, it is not free of threats. Fixing the threats requires professional systematization through developing practical guidelines, which brings us to the goal this study was designed to achieve. The study was conducted qualitatively through literature review, semi-structured interviews, and a focus group discussion with health and media experts, as a result of which 486 codes were extracted and classified into 4 groups. The first group was addressed to media professionals and contained 126 codes in 5 categories: seeking and reporting the truth, harm minimization, integrity, independence, and respect for the rights of others. The second and third groups were addressed to health professionals, the former (150 codes) dealing with formal media, and the latter (190 codes) dealing with cyberspace. These groups were both categorized into 6 categories: scientific demeanor, beneficence, harm minimization,integrity, maintaining the dignity of the profession and professionals, and respect for the rights of others. The fourth group was addressed to the public audience and contained 20 codes categorized into 2 categories: ethics of belief, and ethics of (re-)publishing. Since the study was conducted during the pandemic/infodemic, the proposed codes can help reduce possible conflicts in similar future situations.

  • XML | PDF | downloads: 27 | views: 116

    Breaking bad news to patients is an essential aspect of the physician-patient relationship, but in Iran, this relationship is often disrupted by patients’ families. This study investigates the views of patients' companions on breaking cancer news. In this descriptive-analytic cross-sectional study, we conducted research on 170 cancer patients’ companions and 170 non-cancer patients’ companions. We designed a questionnaire to investigate the subjects’ opinions and used CVI, CVR, Cronbach's alpha and ICC for evaluation. In order to compare groups, we used Mann Whitney, Kruskal-Wallis, Chi-square tests and Spearman’s correlation. Most participants believed that patients should be informed of their diagnosis. Cancer patients' companions were more willing to learn the bad news in case they were diagnosed with cancer and were less likely to choose “despair” as the reason for non-disclosure (71% vs. 44%).There was no difference between the two groups in willingness to break the cancer news to patients, choosing who should be informed first, and the reasons for non-disclosure. Most participants believed the family should be the first to know the diagnosis. In this study, most participants believed that patients should be informed of their diagnosis. However, they preferred to learn about the diagnosis before the patient, which confirms the importance of educating the families about autonomy.

View All Issues