Given the evolution of the public health (PH) and the changes from the phenomenon of globalization, this area has encountered new ethical challenges. In order to find a coherent approach to address ethical issues in PH policy, this study aimed to identify the evolution of public health ethics (PHE) frameworks and the main moral values and norms in PH practice and policy. According to the research questions, a systematic search of the literature, in English, with no time limit was performed using the main keywords in databases Web of Science (ISI) and PubMed. Finally, the full text of 56 papers was analyzed. Most of the frameworks have common underpinning assumptions and beliefs, and the need to balance PH moral obligation to prevent harm and health promotion with respect for individual autonomy has been specified. As such, a clear shift from liberal values in biomedical ethics is seen toward the community's collective values in PHE. The main moral norms in PH practice and policy included protecting the population against harm and improving PH benefits, utility and evidenced-based effectiveness, distributive justice and fairness, respect for all, privacy and confidentiality, solidarity, social responsibility, community empowerment and participation, transparency, accountability and trust. Systematic review of PHE frameworks indicates utilization of the aforementioned moral norms through an practical framework as an ethical guide for action in the PH policy. The validity of this process requires a systematic approach including procedural conditions.

No abstract

BackgroundOrgan transplantation is one of the most critical topics in medical ethics that is commonplace in various countries. This study aimed to evaluate the knowledge and the ethical issues surrounding organ transplantation and organ donation among healthcare personnel in Tehran, Iran.Material/MethodsIn a cross-sectional study performed on 450 healthcare personnel, self-administered questionnaires were used to derive data from individuals. Among the 450 health personnel who received the questionnaires, 377 completed their questionnaires (83.77%).ResultsThe willingness and unwillingness to donate organs among individuals were 47.48% (n=179) and 52.51% (n=198), respectively. Among the individuals who signed the organ donation card, 96.5% (n=55) were willing to donate their organs and 3.5% (n=2) were unwilling to donate their organs. Most of the individuals that were willing (48.34%; n=175) and unwilling (51.66%; n=187) to donate their organs claimed religious support for organ donation (P=0.00). Out of these people, 110 willing people (67.48%) and 53 (32.52%) unwilling people were familiar with the idea of brain death. The individuals who selected cadavers (67.64%; n=255) and brain death (24.4%; n=92) were chosen as the best candidates for organ donation. Most individuals believed that young patients (n=123; 32.62%) and people who had not already had organ transplants (n=90; 23.87%) should be the preferred recipients of organs. Most individuals had learned about organ transplantation from television (30.24%; n=114), newspapers (23.61%; n=89), and the radio (19.89%; n=75).ConclusionsIn conclusion, there is a need for more educational programs for the improvement of knowledge and ethical consideration with regard to organ transplantation and organ donation among healthcare personnel.

Organ transplantation is a new issue in medical science. It is an important achievement and a sign of the progression and ability of medical centers around the world. Governments, populations, the medical community and people involved in culture, art, and media all have a decisive role in the culture of organ donation, which is the only way to guarantee that the healthy organs of a brain-dead person can continue to work and save the lives of people in need of organ transplantation. The brain death phenomenon and its possible application in organ transplantation, while offering new hope for the salvation of a number of patients, has led to many ethical, cultural, and legal issues. Ethical issues in organ transplantation are very complicated due to many social factors such as religion, culture, and traditions of the affected communities. The ethical and legal points of removing organs from the body of a living or cadaveric source, the definition of brain death, the moral and legal conditions of the donor and the recipient, and the financial relationship between them and many others, are all critical issues in organ transplantation. While there may be no available explicit solution to these issues, they should be rigorously considered by the experts. Efforts to systematically eliminate barriers and solve problems in organ transplantation, can not only reduce the costs of maintaining brain-dead patients and encourage patients that need organ transplantation but can also prevent immoral and illegal activities. In this paper, we have reviewed the most important and current challenges in organ transplantation with a view to the ethical considerations, and we have suggested some strategies to extend it in Iran.

Background: Interests in nanotechnology and its application in medical research, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases continuously grow. The study identified the theoretical and practical principles of ethics in developed countries’ nanomedical research to be used as the first step of development of a national nanoethics standard or guideline in Iran and developing countries. Methods: The present study was done between 2012-2016 in Ethics and Law Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran, which comprised a literature review and a comparative study to describe and compare the nanoethics situation and considerations of nanoethics in Australia, Canada, and USA. Results: The main ethical considerations in the three countries contain two major categories, including firstly, the nature of nanoparticles such as its diversity, rapid development of new and not well-defined nanoproducts and particles and unpredictable side effects of such nanoparticles; and secondly, the application of developed nanoparticles in areas such as justice, privacy protection, patient-physician relations, etc. Conclusion: It is controversial to develop an independent nanoethics standard or codes; however, national priorities and concerns, as well as specific nanoethics considerations, should be investigated before deciding to create such standards in each country. Overall, careful considerations have to take into account the justice, privacy protection, the inherent risks of nanomaterials and their possible side effects on patients and other study subjects, as well as considering characteristics of new developed nanoproducts and particles.