Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ethical Frameworks

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Communicating about Risks and Safe Use of Medicines

Abstract

Evidence about benefits and risks of medicines can guide the communication about risks and safe use of medicinal products—but not all the way. Ethical questions arise when science cannot produce conclusive answers to important questions or when there is a tension between scientific knowledge and other values, beliefs or perceptions. Examples are questions around new, inconclusive evidence about potential adverse effects of marketed medicines or regarding unintended effects of risk communication, such as shame, changes in therapy adherence or stigmatisation experienced by individuals using a certain medicine. Ensuring adequate and timely communication about risks and safe use of medicines therefore depends partly on ethical considerations, such as the duty of beneficence to patients and communities, the patient right to autonomy and collective responsibility. Health communication practices need to be based on a fair balance of relevant ethical norms and values. In this chapter, an ethical perspective on medicinal product risk communication will be introduced and four areas of ethical tension and the contexts of uncertainty and trust are discussed, which should be taken into account when planning or evaluating communication events.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adler D, Zlotnik Shaul R (2012) Disciplining bioethics: towards a standard of methodological rigor in bioethics research. Account Res 19(3):187–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez AAA (2001) How rational should bioethics be? The value of empirical approaches. Bioethics 15:501–519

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Anonymous (2007) The method in bioethics research. Kennedy Inst Ethics J 17:277–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bahri P, Rägo L (2019) CIOMS guide to vaccine safety communication: executive summary. Vaccine 37:401–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker DE (2009) Medication alert fatigue: the potential for compromised patient safety. Hosp Pharm 449(6):460–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauchner H, Fontanarosa PB (2013) Restoring confidence in the pharmaceutical industry. JAMA 309:607–609

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp TL, Childress JF (2012) Principles of biomedical ethics, vol 51, 7th revised edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergstresser SM (2015) Health communication, public mistrust, and the politics of “rationality”. Am J Bioeth 15(4):57–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Estrada C et al (1999) Health literacy and numeracy. JAMA 282(6):527

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fagerlin A, Ubel PA, Smith DM, Zikmund-Fisher BJ (2007) Making numbers matter: present and future research in risk communication. Am J Health Behav 31(Suppl 1):S47–S56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Floridi L (2010) Ethics after the information revolution. In: Floridi L (ed) The Cambridge handbook of information and computer ethics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 3–19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Floridi L (2013) The ethics of information. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Folker AP, Sandøe P (2008) Leaping “out of the doubt” - nutrition advice: values at stake in communicating scientific uncertainty to the public. Health Care Anal 16:176–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galesic M, Garcia-Retamero R (2013) Using analogies to communicate information about health risks. Appl Cogn Psychol 27:33–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia-Retamero R, Andrade A, Sharit J, Ruiz JG (2015) Is patient’s numeracy related to physical and mental health? Med Decis Mak 35:501–511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin J, Honeycutt L (2009) When science goes public: from technical arguments to appeals to authority. Stud Commun Sci 9(2):19–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Guttman N, Salmon CT (2004) Guilt, fear, stigma and knowledge gaps: ethical issues in public health communication interventions. Bioethics 18(6):531–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall MA (2005) The importance of trust for ethics, law, and public policy. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 14:156–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez JF, van Thiel GJMW, Mantel-Teeuwisse AK, Raaijmakers JAM, Pieters T (2014) Restoring trust in the pharmaceutical sector on the basis of the SSRI case. Drug Discov Today 19:523–527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Institute of Medicine (2010) Ethical issues in studying the safety of approved drugs: a letter report. The National Academies Press, Washington, pp 3–6

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaac T, Weissman JS, Davis RB, Massagli M, Cyrulik A, Sands DZ, Weingart SN (2009) Overrides of medication alerts in ambulatory care. Arch Intern Med 169(3):305–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ives J, Dunn M, Cribb A (2017) Theoretical perspectives: an introduction. In: Ives J, Dunn M, Cribb A (eds) Empirical bioethics. Theoretical and practical perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 3–16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jones Ringold D (2002) Boomerang effects in response to public health interventions: some unintended consequences in the alcoholic beverage market. J Consum Policy 25:27–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson RE (2015) Risk governance and the social amplification of risk: a commentary. In: Fra.Paleo U (ed) Risk governance. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 485–487

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuczewski M (1998) Casuistry and principlism: the convergence of method in biomedical ethics. Theor Med Bioeth 19:509–524

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Löfstedt R, Bouder F, Wardman J, Chakraborty S (2011) The changing nature of communication and regulation of risk in Europe. J Risk Res 14(4):409–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marantz PR (1990) Blaming the victim: the negative consequence of preventive medicine. Am J Public Health 80:1186–1187

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McCormack L, Lefebvre RC, Bann C, Taylor O, Rausch P (2016) Consumer understanding, preferences, and responses to different versions of drug safety messages in the United States: a randomized controlled trial. Drug Saf 39:171–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minkler M (1999) Personal responsibility for health? A review of the arguments and the evidence at century’s end. Health Educ Behav 26(1):121–140

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Molewijk AC, Siggelbout A, Otten W, Dupuis H, Kievit J (2004) Empirical data and moral theory. A plea for integrated empirical ethics. Med Health Care Philos 7:71–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nyhan B, Reifler J, Richey S, Freed GL (2014) Effective messages in vaccine promotion: a randomized trial. Pediatrics 133(4):e835–e842

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sidgwick H (1962) The methods of ethics. Macmillan, London, p 1

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • van Thiel, GJMW, Stolk PS (2013) Patient and citizen involvement in priority setting for pharmaceutical innovation. Background paper for the WHO Priority Medicines for Europe and the World 2013 report. WHO, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • van Thiel GJMW, van Delden JJM (2010) Reflective equilibrium as a normative empirical model. Ethical Perspect 17:183–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerckhove W (2018) Whistleblowing and information ethics: facilitation, entropy, and ecopoiesis. J Bus Ethics 152:15–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warburton P (2010) Numeracy and patient safety: the need for regular staff assessment. Nurs Stand 24(27):42–44

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Widdershoven G, Abma T, Molewijk B (2009) Empirical ethics as dialogical practice. Bioethics 23:236–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Humanities, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands

    Ghislaine van Thiel

Authors
  1. Ghislaine van Thiel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ghislaine van Thiel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. European Medicines Agency (EMA), Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, The Netherlands

    Priya Bahri

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

van Thiel, G. (2020). Ethical Frameworks. In: Bahri, P. (eds) Communicating about Risks and Safe Use of Medicines. Adis, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3013-5_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3013-5_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Adis, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-15-3012-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-15-3013-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation