Lost in translation: the history of the Ebers Papyrus and Dr. Carl H. von Klein

While the Ebers Papyrus is understood to be one of the oldest and most complete contemporaneous perspectives on Ancient Egyptian healing practices, nothing has yet been said about the biography of its first English-language translator, Dr. Carl H. von Klein. A German immigrant and surgeon in the American Midwest, von Klein spent twenty-some years meticulously translating and annotating the Papyrus, but ultimately his manuscript was destroyed. In this paper, we examine the societal- and personal-scale forces that thwarted his efforts to transform our understanding of the history of medicine.

Selling Clinical Biospecimens: Guidance for Researchers and Private Industry

The recently revised Common Rule requires that donors of biospecimens for research be informed if their specimens might be used for commercial profit. The Common Rule, however, does not apply to sharing or selling de-identified biospecimens that are "leftover" from clinical uses. As a result, many medical researchers remain uncertain of their legal and ethical obligations when a commercial entity expresses interest in these specimens.

The White Coat Cape: An Ethical Analysis of Emerging Therapies to Treat Spinal Muscular Atrophy

The recent emergence of promising therapies to treat neuromuscular diseases such as spinal muscular atrophy raises important questions regarding the ethical permissibility of allowing a parent to refuse these Food and Drug Administration-approved drugs. The 3 most recent drugs targeting spinal muscular atrophy have all been approved since 2019, lack long-term data regarding potential side-effects and long-term benefits, and are costly. Indeed, onasemnogene abeparvovec-xioi (Zolgensma) has been called the most expensive drug in the world. Contemporary analyses of innovative therapies, compassionate use medications, off-label usage, and emerging therapies tend to focus on the importance of informed consent in framing the ethical dimensions of these medications. This manuscript utilizes a narrative framework of "rescue" to explore the competing perspectives of optimistic physicians and parents, who may decline the therapies finding the benefit-burden profile does not weigh in favor of their use. Ultimately, this paper concludes that such refusal should be considered ethically permissible until such time as more long-term data are available for these medications and their cost has decreased substantially.

Perceptions of the ethical permissibility of strict travel restrictions to mitigate transmission of SARS-CoV-2

Although there has been extensive exploration of public opinion surrounding many non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) aimed at mitigating transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (e.g. mask-wearing and social distancing), there has been less discussion of the public's perception of the ethical appropriateness other NPIs. This paper presents the results of a survey of U.S. adults' opinions of the ethical permissibility of both state-to-state and international travel restrictions to mitigate transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Our research revealed overall high agreement with the ethical permissibility of both state-to-state and international travel restrictions, though we saw significant difference across political party affiliation and conservative/liberal ideologies. Other factors associated with agreement with state-to-state travel restrictions included increasing education, increasing income, and both high and low commitment altruism. When considering international travel restrictions, income, education, and low commitment altruism were associated with increased agreement with the ethical permissibility of international travel restrictions. Ethical analysis and implications are explored.

Development of Written Materials for Participants in an Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias Screening Trial

Given that participants' experiences in clinical trials include a variety of communication touchpoints with clinical trial staff, these communications should be designed in a way that enhances the participant experience by paying attention to the self-determination theoretical concepts of competence, autonomy, and relatedness. In this feature, we argue that clinical trial teams need to consider the importance of how they design their written participant communication materials, and we explain in detail the process our multidisciplinary team took to design written materials for the patient and family caregiver participants in our Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) screening trial. This article concludes with suggested guidance and steps for other clinical trial teams.

Influenza vaccination in the time of COVID-19: A national U.S. survey of adults

Introduction

Decisions about influenza vaccination for fall-winter 2020 were made against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic. During May 2020, the authors examined intended vaccination in the next 12 months in relationship to demographic variables, healthcare attitudes, and personal COVID-19 experiences for two samples of adults--those who did not receive influenza vaccine during the prior 12 months, and those who did.

Methods

In May 2020, a cross-sectional online survey was conducted with a national US sample. Participants reported prior influenza vaccination (yes/no during prior 12 months) and anticipated vaccination (yes/no during next 12 months). Covariates included demographic characteristics (e.g., gender, race-ethnicity, political ideology), general beliefs (e.g., benefits of vaccines, altruistic attitudes), and COVID-19 health beliefs and experiences (COVID-19 worry and severity, perception of COVID-19 as a community threat, knowing someone with COVID-19). For each group, hierarchical multivariable logistic regression was conducted with intent to vaccinate as the outcome.

Results

Among participants (n = 3502), 47% did not receive influenza vaccine in the prior 12 months and 53% had; 25.5% of non-vaccinators and 91.9% of vaccinators intended future vaccination. For non-vaccinators, odds of intending vaccination was associated with race/ethnicity (Hispanics were more likely to intend than white-NH; AOR = 1.74; 95% CI = 1.23–2.4), greater perceived benefits of vaccination (AOR = 2.19; 95% CI = 1.88–2.54), and perception of COVID-19 as a community threat (AOR = 1.91; 95% CI = 1.49–2.45). For vaccinators, odds of intending vaccination was associated with age (AOR = 1.04; 95% CI = 1.03–1.05), race/ethnicity (Black-NH and Other-NH were less likely to intend than white-NH, AOR = 0.60; 95% CI = 0.36–0.999; and AOR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.24–0.84, respectively), greater perceived benefits of vaccination (AOR = 1.88; 95% CI = 1.45–2.45) and greater perception of collective benefits of vaccines (AOR = 1.48; 95% CI = 1.15–1.90).

Conclusions

The COVID-19 pandemic may have served as a cue to action for influenza vaccination intention among some prior non-vaccinators whereas intention among prior vaccinators is more related to positive attitudes toward vaccination.

Public perceptions of the effectiveness of recommended non-pharmaceutical intervention behaviors to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented public health threat, both in scope and response. With no vaccine available, the public is advised to practice non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) including social distancing, mask-wearing, and washing hands. However, little is known about public perceptions of the effectiveness of these measures, and high perceived effectiveness is likely to be critical in order to achieve widespread adoption of NPI.

Methods

In May 2020, we conducted a cross-sectional survey among U.S. adults (N = 3,474). The primary outcome was a six-item measure assessing perceived effectiveness of recommended behaviors to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection from 1 (not at all effective) to 5 (extremely effective). The sample was divided into “higher” and “lower” perceived effectiveness groups. Covariates included demographics, healthcare characteristics, and health beliefs. Variables that were significant at p<0.01 in bivariate analyses were entered into a multivariable logistic regression and a best-fit model was created using a cutoff of p<0.01 to stay in the model.

Results

Mean age was 45.5 years and most participants were non-Hispanic White (63%) and female (52.4%). The high perceived effectiveness group was slightly larger than the low perceived effectiveness group (52.7% vs. 47.3%). Almost all health belief variables were significant in the best-fit regression model. COVID-19-related worry (aOR = 1.82; 95% CI = 1.64–2.02), and perceived threat to physical health (aOR = 1.32; 95% CI = 1.20–1.45) were positively associated with perceived effectiveness while perceived severity of COVID-19 (0.84; 95% CI = 0.73–0.96) and perceived likelihood of infection (0.85; 95% CI = 0.77–0.94) switched directions in the adjusted model and were negatively associated with perceived effectiveness.

Conclusions

This research indicates people generally believe NPI are effective, but there was variability based on health beliefs and there are mixed rates of engagement in these behaviors. Public health efforts should focus on increasing perceived severity and threat of SARS-CoV-2-related disease, while promoting NPI as effective in reducing threat.

A National Survey Assessing SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination Intentions: Implications for Future Public Health Communication Efforts

With SARS-CoV-2 vaccines under development, research is needed to assess intention to vaccinate. We conducted a survey (N = 3,159) with U.S. adults in May 2020 assessing SARS-CoV-2 vaccine intentions, intentions with a provider recommendation, and sociodemographic and psychosocial variables. Participants had high SARS-CoV-2 vaccine intentions (M = 5.23/7-point scale), which increased significantly with a provider recommendation (M = 5.47). Hierarchical linear regression showed that less education and working in health care were associated with lower intent, and liberal political views, altruism, and COVID-19-related health beliefs were associated with higher intent. This work can inform interventions to increase vaccine uptake, ultimately reducing COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality.

Anticipatory Waivers of Consent for Pediatric Biobanking

As pediatric biobank research grows, additional guidance will be needed about whether researchers should always obtain consent from participants when they reach the legal age of majority. Biobanks struggle with a range of practical and ethical issues related to this question. We propose a framework for the use of anticipatory waivers of consent that is empirically rooted in research that shows that children and adolescents are often developmentally capable of meaningful deliberation about the risks and benefits of participation in research. Accordingly, bright-line legal concepts of majority or competency do not accurately capture the emerging capacity for autonomous decision-making of many pediatric research participants and unnecessarily complicate the issues about contacting participants at the age of majority to obtain consent for the continued or first use of their biospecimens that were obtained during childhood. We believe the proposed framework provides an ethically sound balance between the concern for potential exploitation of vulnerable populations, the impetus for the federal regulations governing research with children, and the need to conduct valuable research in the age of genomic medicine.

How The Fault in Our Stars illuminates four themes of the Adolescent End of Life Narrative

Adolescents who face life-limiting illness have unique developmental features and strong personal preferences around end of life (EOL) care. Understanding and documenting those preferences can be enhanced by practising narrative medicine. This paper aims to identify a new form of narrative, the Adolescent End of Life Narrative, and recognise four central themes. The Adolescent EOL Narrative can be observed in young adult fiction, The Fault in Our Stars, which elucidates the notion that terminally ill adolescents have authentic preferences about their life and death. Attaining narrative competence and appreciating the distinct perspective of the dying adolescent allows medical providers and parents to support the adolescent in achieving a good death. By thinking with the Adolescent EOL Narrative, adults can use Voicing my CHOiCES, an EOL planning guide designed for adolescents, to effectively capture the adolescent's preferences, and the adolescent can make use of this type of narrative to make sense of their lived experience.

Liver Allocation to Non-U.S. Citizen Non-U.S. Residents: An Ethical Framework for a Last-in-Line Approach

The incidence of non-U.S. citizen non-U.S. resident patients coming to the United States specifically for deceased donor liver transplantation raises compelling ethical questions that require careful consideration. The inclusion of these often financially and/or socially privileged patients in the pool of potential candidates for an absolutely scarce and life-saving liver transplant may exacerbate disparities already existing in deceased donor liver allocation. In addition, their inclusion on organ transplant waiting lists conflicts with recognized ethical principles of justice and reciprocity. Moreover, preliminary data suggest that public awareness of this practice could discourage organ donation, thereby worsening an already profound supply-demand gulf. Finally, U.S. organ allocation policies and statutes are out of step with recently promulgated international transplant guidelines, which prioritize self-sufficiency of organ programs. This article analyzes each of these ethical conflicts within the context of deceased donor liver transplantation and recommends policy changes that align the United States with international practices that discourage this scenario.