Show simple item record

FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMayes, Christopher
dc.contributor.authorWilliams, Jane
dc.contributor.authorKerridge, I
dc.contributor.authorLipworth, W
dc.date.accessioned2017-11-08
dc.date.available2017-11-08
dc.date.issued2017-11-03
dc.identifier.citationMayes C, Williams J, Kerridge I, Lipworth W. Scientism, conflicts of interest, and the marginalization of ethics in medical education. J Eval Clin Pract. 2017;1-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12843en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2123/17516
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12843
dc.description.abstractAim: This paper reports on the findings from 6 focus groups conducted with Australian medical students. The focus groups sought students' perspectives on how the influence of commercial interests on medical practice and education could be managed. Method: We conducted 6 focus groups with medical students in New South Wales, Australia. Participants were recruited via student‐run medical society and faculty e‐mail lists. Forty‐nine students from 6 medical schools in New South Wales participated. The research team reflected on the extent to which students uncritically appealed to science in the abstract as a management solution for conflicts of interest. Data analysis was largely inductive, looking for uses of scientific terminology, EBM, and appeals to “science” in the management of COI and applied theoretical analyses of scientism. Results: The students in our study suggested that science and evidence‐based medicine, rather than ethics or professionalism, were the best tools to deal with undue influence and bias. This paper uses philosophy of science literature to critically examine these scientistic appeals to science and EBM as a means of managing the influence of pharmaceutical reps and commercial interests. We argue that a scientistic style of reasoning is reinforced through medical curricula and that students need to be made aware of the epistemological assumptions that underpin science, medicine, and EBM to address the ethical challenges associated with commercialised health care. Conclusion: More work is needed to structure medical curricula to reflect the complexities of practice and realities of science. However, curricula change alone will not sufficiently address issues associated with commercial interests in medicine. For real change to occur, there needs to be a broader social and professional debate about the ways in which medicine and industry interact, and structural changes that restrict or mitigate commercial influences in educational, research, and policy settings.en_AU
dc.description.sponsorshipThis study was funded by a National Health & Medical Research Council Project Grant (APP1059732)en_AU
dc.language.isoen_AUen_AU
dc.publisherJohn Wiley & Sons, Ltden_AU
dc.relationhttp://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/1059732en_AU
dc.subjectepistemologyen_AU
dc.subjectevidence-based medicineen_AU
dc.subjectmedical educationen_AU
dc.subjectmedical ethicsen_AU
dc.subjectpractical reasoningen_AU
dc.subjectscienceen_AU
dc.titleScientism, conflicts of interest, and the marginalization of ethicsen_AU
dc.typeArticleen_AU
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12843
dc.type.pubtypePublisher's versionen_AU


Show simple item record

Associated file/s

There are no files associated with this item.

Associated collections

Show simple item record

There are no previous versions of the item available.