Explore the vast range of titles available.

This study examined the barriers to complying with nursing ethics principles in adult intensive care units at teaching hospitals affiliated with Tabriz University of Medical Sciences and their relationship with caring behaviors in 2024. Using a descriptive-analytical design, 300 ICU nurses were surveyed through proportional random sampling. Data were collected via demographic forms, an ethical barriers questionnaire, and the Caring Behaviors Inventory (CBI-42). Results showed that the \"individual and caring\" domain had the highest ethical barrier score (52.36 ± 9.43), while the \"workspace\" domain had the lowest (20.56 ± 3.44). Most nurses (75.3%) perceived ethical barriers to be serious. Among the caregiving behaviors, \"respect for others\" had the highest score (56.93 ± 10.69), and \"attention to others' experiences\" had the lowest (20.02 ± 3.68). No significant correlation was found between ethical barriers and caregiving behaviors (P = 0.072, r = 0.104). Despite serious ethical challenges, the nurses in this study maintained acceptable standards of care. It is recommended to conduct further research into the specific ethical barriers subscales to better understand their influence on care quality and to develop strategies to improve nurses’ working conditions.

By mid-2019 there were more than 80 AI ethics guides available in the public domain. Despite this, 2020 saw numerous news stories break related to ethically questionable uses of AI. In part, this is because AI ethics theory remains highly abstract, and of limited practical applicability to those actually responsible for designing algorithms and AI systems. Our previous research sought to start closing this gap between the ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of AI ethics through the creation of a searchable typology of tools and methods designed to translate between the five most common AI ethics principles and implementable design practices. Whilst a useful starting point, that research rested on the assumption that all AI practitioners are aware of the ethical implications of AI, understand their importance, and are actively seeking to respond to them. In reality, it is unclear whether this is the case. It is this limitation that we seek to overcome here by conducting a mixed-methods qualitative analysis to answer the following four questions: what do AI practitioners understand about the need to translate ethical principles into practice? What motivates AI practitioners to embed ethical principles into design practices? What barriers do AI practitioners face when attempting to translate ethical principles into practice? And finally, what assistance do AI practitioners want and need when translating ethical principles into practice?

Despite the immense societal importance of ethically designing artificial intelligence, little research on the public perceptions of ethical artificial intelligence principles exists. This becomes even more striking when considering that ethical artificial intelligence development has the aim to be human-centric and of benefit for the whole society. In this study, we investigate how ethical principles (explainability, fairness, security, accountability, accuracy, privacy, and machine autonomy) are weighted in comparison to each other. This is especially important, since simultaneously considering ethical principles is not only costly, but sometimes even impossible, as developers must make specific trade-off decisions. In this paper, we give first answers on the relative importance of ethical principles given a specific use case—the use of artificial intelligence in tax fraud detection. The results of a large conjoint survey ( n = 1099 ) suggest that, by and large, German respondents evaluate the ethical principles as equally important. However, subsequent cluster analysis shows that different preference models for ethically designed systems exist among the German population. These clusters substantially differ not only in the preferred ethical principles but also in the importance levels of the principles themselves. We further describe how these groups are constituted in terms of sociodemographics as well as opinions on artificial intelligence. Societal implications, as well as design challenges, are discussed.

Ethics has powerful teeth, but these are barely being used in the ethics of AI today – it is no wonder the ethics of AI is then blamed for having no teeth. This article argues that ‘ethics’ in the current AI ethics field is largely ineffective, trapped in an ‘ethical principles’ approach and as such particularly prone to manipulation, especially by industry actors. Using ethics as a substitute for law risks its abuse and misuse. This significantly limits what ethics can achieve and is a great loss to the AI field and its impacts on individuals and society. This article discusses these risks and then highlights the teeth of ethics and the essential value they can – and should – bring to AI ethics now.

The objective of this paper is to investigate, through a qualitative study based on 38 semi-structured interviews with agents who provide assurance of sustainability reports, how they perceive and manage ethical issues underlying the verification of sustainability reports. Most of the ethical issues observed involve four interconnected aspects: the commercialism underlying sustainability assurance, the symbolic nature of the verification process, interdependency between auditing and consulting activities, and familiarity with the audited companies. The findings shed light on the reflexivity of assurance providers on these issues and the legitimation strategies used to explain how they reconcile the independence and impartiality required for auditing activities with commercial aspects related to client-provider relationships. The study also shows the role of contextual variables in the ethics of assurance services. The paper contributes to the literature on the legitimacy of sustainability assurance and commercialism of the audit function. Practical implications and avenues for future research are also developed.

Ethical work climate (EWC), introduced by Bart Victor and John Cullen, plays a central role in the business ethics literature due to its influence on employee’s ethical decision-making. Yet, the often-used framework is limited as a descriptive and prescriptive model because it lacks a normative focus and does not allow for organizations guided by (arguably) universal ethical principles. We revisit Victor and Cullen’s original conceptualization of ethical climate and propose a reformulation of the ethical criteria to be conceptually consistent with Kohlberg’s theory of cognitive moral development and to accommodate principled climates. We also describe how the locus of analysis dimension can be simplified to allow for a more parsimonious and potentially more valid theory. In doing so, we eliminate redundancy noted in the original model and clarify normative preference among the ethical climate types. We discuss implications for research, teaching, and practice.

The current paper examines whether knowledge of an ethical principle influences moral awareness and ethical decision making. Using hypothetical scenarios (Studies 1 and 2) and a behavioral task (Study 3), three experiments examine the effects of deepening people's knowledge of ethical principles (conflicts of interest in Studies 1 and 3; safety in Study 2). In each study, an analogical encoding learning intervention led to greater knowledge of an ethical principle, which in turn resulted in a greater likelihood of moral awareness and making ethical decisions. These findings suggest that moral awareness is partly a matter of the depth of individuals' knowledge of ethical principles. The findings provide further reasons to link work on ethics with work on expertise and knowledge transfer as well as indicate new approaches to ethics training.

Background Clinical decision-making involves ethical issues that become more and more complex. Nurse interns must be more skilled in making rational and timely decisions when facing ethical dilemmas. The contributing factors and their relationships that challenge ethical decision-making among nurse interns must be fully understood, as this level of knowledge can support the development of strategies and interventions that improve the ethical decision-making ability of nurse interns. Objective This study examined the relationships between moral courage, moral sensitivity, and ethical decision-making by nurse interns. In addition, we investigated whether moral sensitivity mediates the relationship between moral courage and ethical decision-making. Design A descriptive cross-sectional study using an online questionnaire. Setting The study sampled nurse interns from Class iii Grade A general hospitals in Sichuan Province, China. Participants A convenience sampling method was used to select 1334 nurse interns from March 2022 to May 2022. Methods A general information questionnaire, the Nurses’ Moral Courage Scale (NMCS), the Chinese Moral Sensitivity Questionnaire (MSQ), and the Judgement About Nursing Decision (JAND) were used for data collection. Data was processed and analysed using SPSS 26.0 and Amos 28.0. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation analysis, and structural equation modelling. Results Moral courage was found to be positively correlated with ethical decision-making ( P  < 0.01). Moral sensitivity was also positively correlated with ethical decision-making ( P  < 0.01) and had a mediating effect on the relationship between moral courage and ethical decision-making ( P  < 0.01). Conclusions The moral courage and moral sensitivity of nurse interns are positively correlated with ethical decision-making ability. Moral sensitivity significantly mediates the relationship between moral courage and ethical decision-making ability. The knowledge gained from this study can inform educational strategies and interventions in supporting the development of nurse interns’ ethical decision-making ability.

Introduction Health care systems around the world are struggling with limited resources, in relation to the prevailing health care need. An accessible primary care is an important part of the solution for how to provide affordable care for the population and reduce pressure on the overall health care system such as unnecessary hospital stays and associated costs. As primary care constitutes an important first line of healthcare, the task of prioritising and deciding what to do and for whom lies in practice, primarily with the primary care professionals. Thus, the decisions and behaviour of primary care professionals have a central role in achieving good and equal health in the population. The aim of this study is to explore how primary health care professionals handle situations with limited resources and enhance our knowledge of priorities in practice.  Methods Semi-structured interviews with 14 health care professionals (7 nurses, 7 physicians) working in Swedish primary care were interviewed. Data were analysed inductively with content analysis. Findings Three main categories were found: Influx of patients; Structural conditions; and Actions. Each category illustrates an important aspect for what primary care professionals do to achieve good and equal care. The influx of patients concerned what the professionals handled in terms of patients’ healthcare needs and patient behaviour. Structural conditions consisted of policies and goals set for primary care, competence availability, technical systems, and organisational culture. To handle situations due to limited resources, professionals performed different actions: matching health care needs with professionals’ competency, defining care needs to suit booking systems appointments, giving care at the inappropriate health care level, rearranging workhours, and passing on the decision making. Conclusion Priorities in primary care are not, “one fits all” solution. Our study shows that priorities in primary care comprise of ongoing daily processes that are adapted to the situation, context of patient influx, and structural conditions. Healthcare professional’s actions for how influx of patients’ is handled in relation to limited resources, are created, and shaped within this context which also sets the boundaries for their actions.

Over the past decade, significant progress in artificial intelligence (AI) has spurred the adoption of its algorithms, addressing previously daunting challenges. Alongside these remarkable strides, there has been a simultaneous increase in model complexity and reliance on opaque AI models, lacking transparency. In numerous scenarios, the systems themselves may necessitate making decisions entailing ethical dimensions. Consequently, it has become imperative to devise solutions to integrate ethical considerations into AI system development practices, facilitating broader utilization of AI systems across various domains. Research endeavors should explore innovative approaches to enhance ethical principles in AI systems, fostering greater transparency, accountability, and trustworthiness. Upholding fundamental individual rights, human dignity, autonomy, privacy, equality, and fairness, while mitigating potential harm, remains paramount. Considering ethical values and ensuring compliance with ethical requirements throughout the development lifecycle of autonomous and intelligent systems nurture trust and reliability in their utilization. Ethical considerations should be ingrained within organizational procedures guiding AI research activities, establishing robust frameworks that address ethical concerns and reflect the ethical implications of AI-based systems. This paper presents an overview of ethical approaches and processes aimed at integrating ethical considerations into AI system development practices. It underscores the significance of ethical frameworks in fostering ethical AI implementation and ensuring the ethical integrity of AI technologies.