Publishing scholarly articles in traditional and newly-launched journals is a responsible task, requiring diligence from authors, reviewers, editors, and publishers. The current generation of scientific authors has ample opportunities for publicizing their research. However, they have to selectively target journals and publish in compliance with the established norms of publishing ethics. Over the past few years, numerous illegitimate or predatory journals have emerged in most fields of science. By exploiting gold Open Access publishing, these journals paved the way for low-quality articles that threatened to change the landscape of evidence-based science. Authors, reviewers, editors, established publishers, and learned associations should be informed about predatory publishing practices and contribute to the trustworthiness of scholarly publications. In line with this, there have been several attempts to distinguish legitimate and illegitimate journals by blacklisting unethical journals (the Jeffrey Beall's list), issuing a statement on transparency and best publishing practices (the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association's and other global organizations' draft document), and tightening the indexing criteria by the Directory of Open Access Journals. None of these measures alone turned to be sufficient. All stakeholders of science communication should be aware of multiple facets of unethical practices and publish well-checked and evidence-based articles.
Communication ; Disclosure/*ethics ; *Ethics, Research ; Fraud/*ethics ; Information Dissemination/*ethics ; Medical Writing ; Periodicals as Topic/ethics ; Publishing/*ethics ; Science/*ethics

Medical research should be fully transparent. The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence of author-related conflict of interest (COI) policies and evaluate the actual state of COI disclosure in Korean medical journals. To determine the prevalence of author-related COI policies, we examined the 198 medical journals listed in the KoreaMed database. To investigate the actual state of COI disclosures in published papers, we analyzed the publications in a representative medical journal, the Journal of the Korean Medical Science, from the perspective of the relevance of the ethics of COI disclosure. A total of 164 (82.8%) journals required an author's statement of COI as a criterion for publication. Of these 164, most of them focused on financial COI, with 101 (61.6%) presenting the information related to COI disclosures as a separate paragraph with a clear title. We identified 114 articles published by the Journal of the Korean Medical Science over a seven-year period, from January, 2006 to December, 2012. Of these, 65 papers (57%) included an author's statement of COI. We found that the policies of Korean medical journals regarding the disclosure of author COIs are still behind the internationally suggested level.
*Conflict of Interest ; Disclosure/*ethics ; Editorial Policies ; Periodicals as Topic/ethics ; Publishing/ethics ; Republic of Korea

The birth and development of oocyte donation technology have brought hope for women with poor ovarian reserve and repeated failure for in vitro fertilization, as well as for those with chromosomal abnormalities, premature ovarian failure, or at perimenopausal or menopausal stages. It has not only preserved their reproductive right, but also stabilized their families and increased social harmony. However, this technology does not only involve infertile couples themselves, but also social and ethical issues concerning their families and the society. This paper has reviewed and discussed the hot issues concerning oocyte donation, e.g., source of eggs, compensation for donors, prerequisites for recipients and donors, privacy of donors, and made suggestions for further improvement for the administration of oocyte donation.
Disclosure ; ethics ; Ethics, Medical ; Family Planning Services ; ethics ; methods ; Female ; Fertilization in Vitro ; ethics ; methods ; Humans ; Infertility, Female ; Oocyte Donation ; ethics ; methods ; Tissue Donors ; ethics

Non-disclosure in Paediatric Practice is a controversial issue. There was a time when the care of children was solely the responsibility of parents and any decision with respect to treatment or non-treatment would have been the joint responsibility of the parents and of the attending medical professionals. This practice, viewed as adopting a more paternalistic approach, has been challenged in many parts of the world. In essence what is being challenged is the notion that the sole responsibility of decision-making rests with parents.
Clinical Competence ; Communication ; Decision Making ; Ethics, Medical ; Humans ; Parent-Child Relations ; Patient Rights ; ethics ; Pediatrics ; ethics ; Physician-Patient Relations ; ethics ; Practice Patterns, Physicians' ; Truth Disclosure ; ethics

Conflict of interest exists when an author, reviewer, or editor has relationships that might inappropriately influence his or her actions. They may be personal, commercial, political, academic or financial. "Financial" interests may include employment, research funding, stock or share ownership, payment for lectures or travel, consultancies or company support for staff. Such interests, where relevant, must be declared to editors by researchers, authors, and reviewers. Editors should also disclose relevant conflicts of interest to their readers. If in doubt, disclose. Sometimes editors may need to withdraw from the review and selection process for the relevant submission.
Conflict of Interest ; Disclosure ; Employment ; Ethics, Medical ; Financial Management ; Humans ; Lectures ; Ownership

Adolescent ; Child ; Confidentiality ; Congenital Abnormalities ; Disclosure ; Humans ; Pediatrics ; ethics ; Psychology, Adolescent

Hope is essential in the face of terminal cancer. Generally in Western societies, patients and their families prefer their doctor to engage them in transparent, realistic, authoritative, empathic and open communication about the diagnosis and prognosis of cancer but this topic is not well studied in the Asian context. With the exponential increase in information about cancer and the many permutations in cancer treatment, rational and otherwise, the doctor-patient relationship is even more critical in planning the best treatment strategy and also in rendering both particular and general hope in the patient's war against cancer. Overall, the majority of drugs tested against cancer have failed to reach the market, and those that have, only provide modest benefits, several major therapeutic breakthroughs notwithstanding. Commoditised medicalisation of the dying process ingrained into the contemporary consciousness can potentially create unrealistic or false hope, therapeutic nihilism and a drain on the resources of both the patient and society. These factors can also detract from the dignity of dying as an acceptable natural process. Hope cannot be confined only to focusing merely on the existential dimension of improving survival through technological intervention. Psychosocial and, where appropriate, spiritual interventions and support also play major roles in relieving suffering and providing hope to the patient. Hope cannot be a victim of misinformation from self-interested external parties, nor be an obsession with just buying promises of extending survival time without sufficient regard for quality of life and achieving a good death.
Attitude to Death ; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Physician-Patient Relations ; ethics ; Prognosis ; Spirituality ; Terminal Care ; ethics ; methods ; psychology ; Truth Disclosure ; ethics

INTRODUCTIONCommunication between patients and physicians is crucial in the disclosure of cancer diagnosis. Although westernisation of Asian societies has resulted in increased awareness of patient autonomy, the family continues to play an important influencing role in the disclosure process. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to characterise the experience of physicians with the disclosure of cancer diagnosis in a westernised Asian population.

METHODSOncologists at a tertiary hospital were approached to participate in this study. Information pertaining to the extent and approach to disclosure was collated. Logistic regression analysis was performed to characterise factors pertaining to the willingness of physicians to fully disclose a diagnosis of cancer.

RESULTSIn all, 25 oncologists (mean age 38 years; 72% men) responded to the survey. A majority of oncologists disclosed a cancer diagnosis directly to the patient over the first few visits. The main reason behind partial or non-disclosure was family objection. Ordinal logistic regression analysis showed that family resistance was the only significant predictor of reluctance to disclose a cancer diagnosis (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONIn this pilot study, contrary to previous reports, we found that oncologists were more likely to disclose a diagnosis of cancer to the patient first, that they do not accede fully to the family's request for non-disclosure and that family resistance was the only significant predictor of reluctance to disclose a diagnosis of cancer.

Adult ; Attitude of Health Personnel ; Cross-Cultural Comparison ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Medical Oncology ; ethics ; Neoplasms ; diagnosis ; psychology ; Physician-Patient Relations ; ethics ; Singapore ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Truth Disclosure ; ethics

AIMS: This study was done to develop an ethical guideline for organ transplatation, a life-saving treatment which helps improve the quality of life. METHODS: This study begins with a survey of the Korean current state of affairs concerning organ transplantation. This study used a survey questionnaire and received responses from 31 hospitals out of 45 hospitals where organ transplantation are being done. After this survey, followed by a discussion of ethical considerations in arranging organ transplants. Before proposing an ethical guideline, this study discusses a series of interesting ethical issues in transplanting(both living and cadaveric)organs including ethical foundations of organ transplantation, distributive justice and matters of donor's consent in organ transplatation. RESULTS: The foremost research for this study boils down to a survey paper titled, "An Analysis of the Current State of Affairs Concerning Organ Transplantation and Ethical Considerations in Domestic and International Hospitals." Based upon data collected from various hospitals, this work analyzes items, such as the frequency and types of organs transplanted in a hospital, the existence of organ transplant coordinator, the performance of the hospital ethics committee, and ethical considerations in obtaining consents from the living donor. Although thousands of organs are annually transplanted in domestic hospitals, virtually none of them are found to meet ethically proper standards. The paper points out the need to institutionalize a nationwide cadaveric organ distribution organization like UNOS(United Network for Organ Sharing) in the U.S., and proposes to stretch out the national health insurance to extensively cover transplanting expenses. "The Ethical Foundation of Organ Transplantation", the author counts three key ethical principles in organ transplantation: the principle of respect for autonomy; the principle of beneficence; and the principle of justice. He argues that in cases of living donor no principle should take precedence over the principle of respect for autonomy and thus it is very important for a hospital to obtain the donor's consent. As for cadaveric organ transplantation, he holds reservation because he is worried that serious shortage of organs for transplantation in conjunction with pure utilitarian considerations could change the definition of death so that the brain death gains more popularity than ever. In addition, the author claims that the proponent of organ transplantation must distinguish the moral dimension of the discussion from the legal one because otherwise she would hardly be able to defend herself from the slippery slope argument against organ transplantation. This paper concludes with a note that we must implement restrictions to avoid undesired effects if organ transplantation could ever be justified. "A Discussion of Distributive Justice in Organ Transplantation" comprises two parts. The first half delineates above mentioned ethical principles in the context of organ transplantation, while the second half goes generally over the UNOS Point System. This work is focused entirely upon cadaveric organ transplants, because the vast majority of organs available for transplants comes from cadavers and the number is still increasing. The UNOS allocates cadaveric organs based upon both medical and justice criteria. Following are summaries of the UNOS policy on organ distribution. Every potential recipient of organ transplants must be listed on the UNOS computer system waiting list. Allocation of cadaveric kidneys consider factors such as waiting time, six antigen match, panel reactive antibody, blood group and age. The UNOS Point System allocates livers to the local patients first, followed by regional and national patients respectively, in order to limit ischemic time. A recipient of liver transplant belongs to one of five(0~4) medical status levels where status 4 is the most medically urgent. At the regional and national levels pancreas are allocated first to patients with excellent HLA matches, while at the local level waiting time is the sole factor. The intestinal organ allocation system is based on two(1~2) patient status codes, ABO blood type identity and time waiting. In heart or lung tranplants ischemic time seriously matters. "A Biomedical Study of Informed Consent from the Organ Donor" investigates several topics: the relevance of the principle of respect for autonomy as the basic principle of informed consent; how the autonomy of the organ donor to be respected; and the role of the hospital ethics committee in obtaining informed consent from the donor. The author finds the principle of respect for patient's autonomy not sufficient for the basic principle of the living donor's informed consent because there is some danger in which the patient may be left uncared-for, and thus she suggests that the principle of nonmaleficence and the principle of care also be considered. That the principle of respect for autonomy turns out not sufficient even for cadaveric organ donation, and so judgment based upon the best interest of the deceased may seem appropriate for people from some special groups. A medical team must make efforts to identify the donor's competence and voluntariness, i.e., preconditions of informed consent. All the relevant medical information should be disclosed to the living donor. Once the donor makes a judgment, medical experts should respect the donor's decision. This article puts an emphasis on the role of the hospital ethics committee in such activities as identifying donor's voluntariness, confirming the disclosure, and evaluating the minority's benefit. The last work in this paper, "A Moral Theological Investigation of the Presumed Consent in Organ Transplantation" talk about Principium Riflexum(the principle of reflection) in an attempt to explain the possibility that we may harvest cadaveric organs from the deceased who while alive had never expressed their wishes concerning organ donation. To apply the principle in the context of presumed consent, the author, a Catholic priest, introduces two elements of the principle. Probabilismus allows us to feel free to choose when we face dubious matters(in dubio libetas), and by the rule of selection we are justified in choosing whatever our consciousness mandates. He takes both elements to support the presumed consent of the deceased because he believes the good that people may contribute to their neighbors by donating organs would obviously override opposing reasons. Although the author argues for the presumed consent from the deceased, he does not overlook the family grief in donating the cadaveric organs. He concludes with a suggestion that we should work to keep the public aware of cadaveric organ donation and to form public opinions education should play a key role. CONCLUSION: Researcher suggest an Ethical Guideline for Organ Transplantation as our study conclusion. 1) Body organs may be transplanted to protect the health and well-being of the patient, but not for the medical or scientific research. 2) Body organs may be taken for transplantation, only with the consent from the donor. In cases of cadaveric donors who have left no formal consent in the lifetime, they are to be presumed to refuse to donate body organs. 3) In principle, cadaveric transplantation is preferred. Living donors are limited to competent adults who have blood ties with the patient, e.g., parents, children, or siblings of the patient. However, reversible tissue like bone marrows donation may be an exception to this limitation. In particular, no living donors may be put under inappropriate pressure or influences. Body organs may be taken from the living donor only if based upon sufficient and easy-to-understand information provided, the donor voluntarily consents after (s)he deliberately balances benefits against harm. 4) Under no circumstances human bodies, organs, or tissues may be sold or purchased for transplantation. A physician should not participate in any transplanting operations if (s)he becomes to know that the transplant has been obtained through a transaction. 5) Recipients of organs for transplantation should be determined in accordance with the principle of justice on the allocation of limited medical resources. 6) When a vital, single organ is to be transplanted, the death of the donor shall have been determined by at least one physician other than the recipient's physician. 7) Transplant procedures of body organs should be undertaken (a) only by physicians who possess special medical knowledge and technical competence developed through special training, study, and laboratory experience and practice, and (b) in medical institutions with adequate facilities. 8) All decision procedures in transplanting body organs should be objective, open to parties involved, kept accurately on record, and maintained for a given period of time.
Adult ; Beneficence ; Bioethics* ; Bone Marrow ; Brain Death ; Cadaver ; Child ; Computer Systems ; Consciousness ; Disclosure ; Education ; Ethics ; Ethics Committees, Clinical ; Foundations ; Furunculosis ; Grief ; Heart ; Human Body ; Humans ; Informed Consent ; Judgment ; Kidney ; Liver ; Living Donors ; Lung ; Mental Competency ; National Health Programs ; Organ Transplantation* ; Pancreas ; Parents ; Presumed Consent ; Public Opinion ; Quality of Life ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Siblings ; Social Justice ; Tissue and Organ Procurement ; Tissue Donors ; Transplants* ; Waiting Lists ; Wedge Argument