The relevance of different trust models for representation in patient organizations: conceptual considerations.

BACKGROUND: Trust within organizations is important for ensuring members' acceptance of the organization's activities and to expand their scope of action. Remarkably, Patient Organizations (POs) that often both function as a forum for self-help and represent patients on the health-political level, have been understudied in this respect. This paper analyzes the relation between trust and representation in POs. We distinguish between two models of representation originating from political theory: the trustee and delegate model and between two types of trust: horizontal and vertical trust. METHODS: Our theoretical approach is illustrated with an analysis of 13 interviews with representatives of German POs. RESULTS: We have found that the delegate model requires horizontal trust and the trustee model vertical trust. Both models: horizontal/delegate and vertical/trustee exist within single POs. CONCLUSIONS: The representation process within POs demands a balancing act between inclusion of affected persons and strategically aggregating a clear-cut political claim. Trust plays in that process of coming from individual wishes to collective and political standpoints a major role both in terms of horizontal as well as vertical trust. Horizontal trust serves the communication between affected members, and vertical trust allows representatives to be decisive.

Artificial Intelligence in Reproductive Medicine - An Ethical Perspective.

Artificial intelligence is steadily being integrated into all areas of medicine. In reproductive medicine, artificial intelligence methods can be utilized to improve the selection and prediction of sperm cells, oocytes, and embryos and to generate better predictive models for in vitro fertilization. The use of artificial intelligence in this field is justified by the suffering of persons or couples who wish to have children but are unable to conceive. However, research into the use of artificial intelligence in reproductive medicine is still in the early experimental stage and furthermore raises complex normative questions. There are ethical research challenges because evidence of the efficacy of certain pertinent systems is often lacking and because of the increased difficulty of ensuring informed consent on the part of the affected persons. Other ethically relevant issues include the potential risks for offspring and the difficulty of providing sufficient information. The opportunity to fulfill the desire to have children affects the welfare of patients and their reproductive autonomy. Ultimately, ensuring more accurate predictions and allowing physicians to devote more time to their patients will have a positive effect. Nevertheless, clinicians must be able to process patient data conscientiously. When using artificial intelligence, numerous actors are involved in making the diagnosis and deciding on the appropriate therapy, raising questions about who is ultimately responsible when mistakes occur. Questions of fairness arise with regard to resource allocation and cost reimbursement. Thus, before implementing artificial intelligence in clinical practice, it is necessary to critically examine the quantity and quality of the data used and to address issues of transparency. In the medium and long term, it would be necessary to confront the undesirable impact and social dynamics that may accompany the use of artificial intelligence in reproductive medicine.

[Capable or incapable of giving consent? Assessing a patient's capacity to consent: Procedures and challenges in daily clinical practice]. / Einwilligungsfähig oder nicht? Zur Praxis der Prüfung von Einwilligungsfähigkeit im klinischen Alltag und deren Herausforderungen.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The capacity of patients to give consent (CTC) is an indispensable prerequisite for informed consent to medical measures. When there is doubt about a patient's CTC, careful assessment is therefore required. Despite a broad theoretical discussion about the conception of CTC and possible procedures for its assessment, there is often a lack of orientation towards binding standardized procedural guidelines in everyday clinical practice. As a consequence, the results of CTC assessments are inconsistent, revealing both interdisciplinary and interindividual variability. In order to improve the quality of CTC assessment, more detailed knowledge about the procedures as well as the problems of CTC testing is needed. Therefore, the aim of this explorative telephone survey was to get an impression of the actual procedures that clinicians apply when in doubt about a patient's CTC. In particular, participants in the survey were asked about the weighting of individual CTC criteria and the difficulties with their application. METHODS: Based on structured questionnaires, telephone interviews with 26 physicians working in German hospitals in the fields of neurology, anaesthesiology, surgery, internal medicine, gynaecology, and reconstructive/aesthetic surgery were conducted. The answers were documented using the paper-and-pencil method, and answers to open questions were summarized with the help of a qualitative data analysis software and a thematic coding scheme. RESULTS: The majority of respondents reported that "sometimes to very often" they had doubts about their patients' CTC, with the examination being mostly conducted in an individual approach without formalized, standardized specifications. Regarding the question about the weighting of the seven assessment criteria proposed in the questionnaire, their importance was predominantly evaluated as being in the range of "partially important" to "very important". Difficulties in the clinical assessment were indicated in relation to the patients themselves, the relationship between physicians and patients, and the assessment situation. The perception of difficulties in the examination of CTC is apparently independent of the relevance attributed to the specific criterion for CTC. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Overall, the results show a high level of agreement with the relevance of the seven CTC criteria included in the survey, but at the same time revealed various verification difficulties. Some of the respondents would like to have more support in determining their patients' CTC. The survey results suggest that precise training and adequate time resources are paramount to this sensitive medical context.