Search

Study Question: Does an informed group of citizens endorse the clinical use of mitochondrial donation in a country where this is not currently permitted?Summary Answer: After hearing balanced expert evidence and having opportunity for deliberation, a majority (11/14) of participants in a citizens' jury believed that children should be able to be born using mitochondrial donation.What Is Known Already: Research suggests that patients, oocyte donors and health professionals support mitochondrial donation to prevent transmission of mitochondrial disease. Less is known about public acceptability of this novel reproductive technology, especially from evidence using deliberative methods.Study Design, Size, Duration: This study comprised a citizens' jury, an established method for determining the views of a well-informed group of community members. The jury had 14 participants, and ran over one and a half days in 2017.Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: Jurors were members of the public with no experience of mitochondrial disease. They heard and engaged with relevant evidence and were asked to answer the question: 'Should Australia allow children to be born following mitochondrial donation?'Main Results and the Role Of Chance: Eleven jurors decided that Australia should allow children to be born following mitochondrial donation; 7 of whom added conditions such as the need to limit who can access the intervention. Three jurors decided that children should not (or not yet) be born using this intervention. All jurors were particularly interested in the reliability of evidence, licensing/regulatory mechanisms and the rights of children to access information about their oocyte donors.Limitations, Reasons For Caution: Jurors' views were well informed and reflected critical deliberation and discussion, but are not intended to be representative of the whole population.Wider Implications Of the Findings: When presented with high quality evidence, combined with opportunities to undertake structured deliberation of novel reproductive technologies, members of the public are able to engage in detailed discussions. This is the first study to use an established deliberative method to gauge public views towards mitochondrial donation.Study Funding/competing Interest(s): This study was funded by a University of Sydney Industry and Community Collaboration Seed Award (2017), which was awarded contingent on additional funding from the Mito Foundation. Additional funding was provided by the Mito Foundation. The Foundation was not involved in jury facilitation or deliberation, nor analysis of research data.Trial Registration Number: Not applicable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To determine what veterinary students in Australia and New Zealand consider important competences in companion animal welfare and ethics ( AWE) required on their first day of practice, and to explore how their priorities relate to gender and stage of study. Methods Undergraduate students at all veterinary schools in Australia and New Zealand were sent an online survey. A subset of questions required participants to rank the importance of preselected AWE topics pertaining to companion animals. Data were analysed to determine differences in the way students of different gender or academic stage prioritised each of these AWE topics. Results Of 3220 currently enrolled students, 851 participated in the survey: 79% were female, 17% male, 4% unspecified. Ranking of the AWE topics, from highest to lowest importance, was: neutering, companion animal husbandry, euthanasia, behaviour and training, animal breeding, over-servicing in relation to animal needs and cosmetic surgery. Female students consistently ranked competency in AWE issues surrounding neutering more highly than male students (P = 0.006). Students in senior years of study ranked the importance of competency in animal abuse/hoarding (P = 0.048), shelter medicine (P = 0.012) and animal breeding (P = 0.002) less highly than those in junior years. Conclusions Australasian veterinary students placed more importance on competency in AWE issues associated with clinical practice (such as neutering and euthanasia) than on professional behaviours (such as over-servicing and animal breeding). However, we consider that emphasis should still be placed on developing graduate competency in the latter categories to reflect growing societal concerns about companion animal over-supply and inappropriate professional conduct. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses challenges associated with the understanding and use of the term overdiagnosis by healthcare professionals, medical researchers and even patients. Topics explored include the research implications of the lack of formal definition for overdiagnosis, the moral and technical concerns that need to be considered before using the said word, and the proposed creation of a term that would properly describe administration of too much medicine.