Justice
Justice - Related Videos
05:59
Isolation of Nuclei from Human Intermuscular Adipose Tissue and Downstream Single-Nuclei RNA Sequencing
0 Views •
Cited by 2 •
2024
The biology of intermuscular adipose tissue (IMAT) is largely unexplored due to the limited accessibility of human tissue. Here, we present a detailed protocol for nuclei isolation and library preparation of frozen human IMAT for single nuclei RNA sequencing to identify the cellular composition of this unique adipose depot.
09:55
In vitro Cell Migration and Invasion Assays
0 Views •
Cited by 627 •
2014
Commonly used, highly accessible methods for examining cell migration and invasion in vitro are described. The first method is the cell wound closure assay that measures cell motility. The second method is the transwell migration and invasion assay that assesses the chemotactic and invasive capacity of cells.
12:54
Vision Training Methods for Sports Concussion Mitigation and Management
0 Views •
Cited by 43 •
2015
This paper describes a protocol to conduct, quantitatively monitor, and assess the success of vision training initiated as part of a sports medical management program including intervention for concussion prevention and performance enhancement.
14:37
Accessibility to Clinical Care for People who use Wheelchairs
0 Views •
2023
Source: Yetsa Tuakli-Wosornu1,2, Jaideep Talwalkar1; 1Yale School of Medicine, 2University of Pittsburgh In the United States, 25% of the general population suffers from one or another type of disability. Ambulatory disabilities, or mobility impairments, represent the most common subcategory, comprising 14% of the country's populace. Different mobility-assistive devices, ranging from canes to scooters, enable increased independence and improved quality of life for those suffering from mobility...
14:32
Using Visual and Narrative Methods to Achieve Fair Process in Clinical Care
0 Views •
Cited by 26 •
2011
This paper illustrates an innovative visual approach (photovoice or photo-elicitation) to achieve fair process in clinical care for patients living with chronic health conditions, illuminate gaps in clinical knowledge, forge better therapeutic relationships, and identify patient-centered goals and possibilities for healing.
FAQs
Justice guides scarce-resource decisions by requiring criteria that are transparent, consistent, and sensitive to relevant differences in need. Clinicians must consider how a choice distributes both benefits and risks, rather than relying on personal preference or socially biased judgments. This approach makes prioritization more ethically defensible while recognizing responsibilities to individual patients and the wider community.
Equal treatment does not always produce equitable opportunity when patients face unequal access, vulnerability, or social constraints. A justice-based assessment therefore asks whether those conditions affect a person’s realistic chance to receive care, not simply whether the same rule was applied to everyone. This perspective helps clinical decisions address disparities without abandoning consistency or transparency.
Healthcare decisions can affect more than the person immediately in front of the clinician, especially when resources or treatment options are limited. Justice asks decision-makers to weigh the patient’s needs alongside the fair distribution of benefits and risks across the community. Making that tension explicit supports decisions that can be explained and ethically defended.
Justice directs attention to whether research-related benefits and risks are distributed fairly among people who may be affected. It also supports transparent, consistent criteria and sensitivity to vulnerability, rather than allowing unequal social conditions to determine who receives opportunities or bears burdens. These considerations help research decisions remain ethically defensible within clinical practice.
Clinicians should identify who may gain or bear risks, apply stated criteria consistently, and check whether vulnerability or social conditions are affecting access. They should also consider the decision’s effects beyond the individual case, explain the rationale transparently, and look for signs of discrimination or disparity. This structured review supports fairer and more accountable clinical judgment.
In triage, Justice discourages arbitrary or discriminatory prioritization. Decisions should use transparent and consistent criteria while considering individual needs and the consequences for the broader patient population. Reviewing how limited options distribute benefits and risks helps clinicians justify priorities, recognize unequal access, and preserve trust even when every patient cannot receive the same care.
At the policy level, Justice connects bedside decisions with patterns of access across populations. Policies can be assessed for whether they distribute care opportunities fairly, account for vulnerability and social conditions, and reduce avoidable disparities. Clear criteria make difficult choices more consistent, while an equitable approach can strengthen public trust and support ethically defensible resource decisions.