LEARN. THINK. EXPLORE.
  • Home
  • class sampler
  • Summer 2023
  • Fall 2023
  • FAQ
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact

Learning Outside the Box

"PHILOSOPHICALLY SPEAKING...":

9/6/2020

0 Comments

 
Which takes precedent: research that could benefit thousands or millions of individuals or the medical needs of a single patient? Doctors have grappled with this question since the early days of the coronavirus pandemic as they have tried, simultaneously, to care for patients and to contribute to medicine's understanding of what works and what doesn't. This article from The New York Times Magazine profiles the debate and the decisions medical professionals were trying to make in the absence of information.

"Narasimhan, who was in charge of more than 20 I.C.U.s across the Northwell Health system, knew heading into the meeting that it might be tense. Adey Tsegaye, a pulmonary-critical-care doctor who was calling in remotely, shared some of Narasimhan’s concerns. The meeting’s agenda included time for remarks from Alex Spyropoulos, a lead researcher at the Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research — the research arm of Northwell — who was running a clinical trial. The research was trying to determine whether a standard dose of an anticoagulant or a higher dose yielded better outcomes for Covid-19 patients who were already on oxygen or a ventilator and were at high risk of organ failure and clotting. A doctor on Narasimhan’s unit had recently been at odds with a member of Spyropoulos’s research team. Stella Hahn, a pulmonary-critical-care doctor, arrived at work the day before the meeting to find that a Covid-19 patient had gone into cardiac arrest. She knew that the patient was enrolled in the clinical trial and had been randomly assigned to receive either the standard dose of the anticoagulant or the higher one. As is always the case in the most rigorous trials, neither the patient nor Hahn was supposed to know to which group this woman belonged. Double-blind, randomized, controlled trials — R.C.T.s — are considered the gold standard in research because they do not allow findings to be muddied by any individual doctor’s biases or assumptions. But Hahn believed that the patient’s condition now called for the higher dose, which could potentially require the patient’s removal from the trial. ... [Hahn] had to rely on her clinical judgment and believed that it was unethical to wait for more information. How could researchers dictate care to a doctor right there at the bedside, especially when a patient’s condition was so dire? ... [Spyropoulos] talked to the group about the importance of high-quality, randomized trials in making scientific progress, and the risks of trying experimental treatments without them. 'I stressed to the group that we should not abandon this principle, even in the very stressful environment of a pandemic that was overwhelming our hospitals at Northwell,' he said. Relying on gut instinct rather than evidence, he told them, was essentially 'witchcraft.'"
www.nytimes.com/2020/08/05/magazine/covid-drug-wars-doctors.html
0 Comments



Leave a Reply.

    Blog sharing news about geography, philosophy, world affairs, and outside-the-box learning

    This blog also appears on Facebook:
    www.facebook.com/LearningOutsideTheBox.LearnThinkExplore

    Archives

    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016

    Categories

    All
    Biogeography
    Book
    Cartograms
    Climate
    Contests
    Cultural Geography
    Demographics
    Economic Geography
    Extraplanetary Geography
    Geography Technology
    "Global Issues..."
    Historical Geography
    Human Geography
    Language Geography
    Miltary Geography
    Out Exploring
    Outside The Box
    Philosophically Speaking
    Physical Geography
    Political Geography
    Quiz
    Science Fiction
    Scifi
    U.S. Geography
    Video/interactive
    World Geo_Africa
    World Geo_Asia
    World Geo_Europe
    World Geography
    World Geo_Latin America
    World Geo_Mid.East
    World Geo_N America
    World Geo_Oceania
    World Geo_oceans
    World Geo_polar
    World Geo_S America

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly
  • Home
  • class sampler
  • Summer 2023
  • Fall 2023
  • FAQ
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact