dc.creatorDe Campos Rudinsky, Thana Cristina
dc.creatorUndurraga, Eduardo
dc.date.accessioned2024-01-10T14:23:01Z
dc.date.available2024-01-10T14:23:01Z
dc.date.created2024-01-10T14:23:01Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier10.1136/medethics-2020-107134
dc.identifier1473-4257
dc.identifier0306-6800
dc.identifierMEDLINE:33632729
dc.identifierhttps://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2020-107134
dc.identifierhttps://repositorio.uc.cl/handle/11534/80031
dc.identifierWOS:000650326600003
dc.description.abstractAlthough empirical evidence may provide a much desired sense of certainty amidst a pandemic characterised by uncertainty, the vast gamut of available COVID-19 data, including misinformation, has instead increased confusion and distrust in authorities' decisions. One key lesson we have been gradually learning from the COVID-19 pandemic is that the availability of empirical data and scientific evidence alone do not automatically lead to good decisions. Good decision-making in public health policy, this paper argues, does depend on the availability of reliable data and rigorous analyses, but depends above all on sound ethical reasoning that ascribes value and normative judgement to empirical facts.
dc.languageen
dc.publisherBMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
dc.rightsacceso restringido
dc.subjectethics
dc.subjectphilosophical ethics
dc.subjectdecision-making
dc.subjectpublic policy
dc.subjectSCIENTISTS
dc.subjectPRINCIPLES
dc.subjectTRUST
dc.titlePublic health decisions in the COVID-19 pandemic require more than 'follow the science'
dc.typeartículo


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución