Originally presented as the author's doctoral thesis, 1978. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 237-246).

Originally presented as the author's doctoral thesis, 1978. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 237-246).

<p> This qualitative study explored the relationship between premature mortality and patients diagnosed with SMI and a co-morbid medical condition. The interviews with participants sought to address the research question: What is the treatment experience medical and psychological, of patients with SMI, and comorbid physical health concerns? Using the phenomenological research design, six patients diagnosed with SMI and a comorbid medical condition were interviewed to gain an understanding of their perceptions of both medical and psychological healthcare services. </p><p> Participants were found to have a detached patient-doctor relationship, which was tied to communication barriers. Long histories of traumatic interactions were also contributing factors to their mental health challenges. A sense of helplessness often presented itself, despite long-term treatment, multiple treatment modalities and medications. The majority of the participants perceived a connection between their mental health and biophysical health. They received predominantly physical wellness advice from their primary care physician, but reported being encouraged to follow-up with their mental health professional. Participants felt that collaboration between their various health care providers would be helpful to their treatment process. The key benefits of this collaboration were to prevent misdiagnosis and improve the prescribing of medication and treatment. From the viewpoint of the SMI participant, it emerged that cross-functional mental health treatment training, out-of-office patient support, and routine treatment re-evaluation would assist both health service providers in diagnosis and treatment of SMI patients with additional biomedical illnesses.</p><p>

Thèse (M.A.)--Université de Sherbrooke (Canada), 2008. / Titre de l'écran-titre (visionné le 1 février 2007). In ProQuest dissertations and theses. Publié aussi en version papier.

<p> The Doctrine of Doing and Allowing (DDA) is the ethical principle that doing harm is morally worse than allowing harm. The objective of this thesis is to show that the DDA is not a viable principle without supplementation. Deontological and consequentialist approaches to the DDA are explored in this thesis. Both approaches are rejected due to the limitations of the binary approach to harms&mdash;the binary approach to harms is the assumption that the badness of harms is best captured by two strict categories of doing and allowing. This thesis develops a sliding-scale approach to harms. This approach is developed by using axiology&ndash;value theory. Value theory is used by consequentialism to determine what goods should be maximized by action and how those goods are ranked. This thesis uses the axiological methodology of Fred Feldman to create a more complex account of the badness of harms. The final chapter of this thesis applies the sliding-scale approach to harms to three end-of-life, medical cases.</p>

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Pacific Graduate School of Psychology, 1996. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 57-08, Section: B, page: 5322. Chair: Shirley Long.

Thesis (Ph.D)--University of Tasmania, 2003. / "The prints of Jeffrey Smart's paintings included within this thesis ... are not available for reproduction."--P. iii. Includes bibliographical references.

<p> Mexico's innovative health reforms have attracted scholarly attention beyond its own borders, making it a valuable case to study how countries set priorities. This dissertation examines the multifaceted topic of priority setting through a multidisciplinary approach: each of the three papers of this dissertation employs one of three disciplinary perspectives: historical, quantitative or normative. The dual focus on mental health and HIV--two highly stigmatized diseases with almost opposite histories of prioritization--further underscores the social and historical aspects of health priority setting. Paper 1, "Outrage and Evidence: Julio Frenk and the Politics of Mental Health Advocacy in Mexico, 1968-2006," examines the recent history of mental health advocacy efforts in Mexico. Tracing the career of Julio Frenk, a contemporary global health leader as well as Mexico's Minister of Health from 2000 to 2006, demonstrates that mental health advocacy moved from a focus on human rights abuses to a statistical-based advocacy that emphasized the burden of mental illness. Paper 2, "Beyond Universal Treatment Access: A Multi-level Study of Mental Health Care in Public HIV Clinics in Mexico," represents the first study of the availability and usage of mental health services among HIV+ individuals in Mexican HIV clinics. This paper uses multi-level modeling of a cross-sectional survey from Mexico's National Institute of Public Health to explore factors associated with patients receiving mental health care. The results indicate that clinic-level factors account for much of the observed variation in mental health care for HIV+ individuals. Paper 3, "'What Magic is there in the Pronoun `My'?' The Role of Patient and Disease Advocates in Public Deliberations about Priority Setting for Health Policy," analyzes the risks and benefits of recent, and often controversial, attempts by countries like Mexico to include this specific class of stakeholder in public deliberation for health. Patient participation does bring the risk of bias due to their partiality. However, by drawing on deliberative democratic theory, this paper argues that such partiality confers epistemic advantages to deliberation, such that, if certain procedural and substantive constraints are met, the benefit of their participation may offset the risks.</p>

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Toronto, 2007. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 68-06, Section: A, page: 2488. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 345-366).

Submitted by Pedro Bravo de Souza (pedrobravodesouza@hotmail.com) on 2018-09-26T10:57:09Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Dissertação Versão Final (Pedro Bravo de Souza).pdf: 935527 bytes, checksum: e4f29872ce25a2664c0c9b47e9a3c459 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Satie Tagara (satie@marilia.unesp.br) on 2018-09-26T14:07:13Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 souza_pb_me_mar.pdf: 935527 bytes, checksum: e4f29872ce25a2664c0c9b47e9a3c459 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-09-26T14:07:13Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 souza_pb_me_mar.pdf: 935527 bytes, checksum: e4f29872ce25a2664c0c9b47e9a3c459 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-09-18 / Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) / Objetivamos avaliar a razoabilidade da abordagem bayesiana de Colin Howson ao problema da indução, tal como formulado por David Hume. Propomos que uma abordagem ao problema da indução será razoável se nossa compreensão da indução não regride em relação àquela fornecida por Hume. Por sua vez, o bayesianismo é uma corrente teórica derivada da adoção das teses conhecidas como gradualismo, probabilismo e revisão pela condicionalização; seu mérito é fornecer um modelo para representar e atualizar graus de crença. Em seu turno, o problema da indução configura-se como a busca para justificar racionalmente argumentos indutivos, tendo em vista a tese humeana segundo a qual é impossível fazê-lo, seja mediante argumentos demonstrativos, seja mediante argumentos prováveis. Para satisfazer a nosso objetivo, esta Dissertação divide-se em quatro capítulos. No primeiro capítulo, expomos o problema da indução e como Howson o interpreta. No segundo capítulo, comentamos propostas de solução ao problema da indução analisadas por ele. No terceiro capítulo, introduzimos conceitos e teses de probabilidade e bayesianismo. No quarto capítulo, apresentamos, em primeiro lugar, as teses específicas de Howson em relação ao problema da indução; em segundo lugar, criticamos sua interpretação de Hume, suas objeções a outras abordagens e sua própria proposta; finalmente, averiguamos a sua razoabilidade. Finalizamos o trabalho sintetizando as considerações realizadas. / We aim to evaluate the reasonability of Colin Howson’s bayesian approach to the problem of induction, as elaborated by David Hume. We propose that an approach to the problem of induction will be reasonable if our induction understanding does not regress in relation to that provided by Hume. In turn, bayesianism is a theoretical position derived from the adoption of gradualism, probabilism and conditionalization theses; its merit is to provide a model for representing and updating degrees of belief. The problem of induction is the search to rationally justify inductive arguments, due to the humean thesis according to which it is impossible to do so, neither through demonstrative arguments, nor through probable arguments. To achieve our goal, this Dissertation is divided into four chapters. In the first chapter, we expose the problem of induction and how Howson interprets it. In the second chapter, we discuss solutions to the problem of induction analyzed by him. In the third chapter, we introduce probability and bayesianism concepts and theses. In the fourth chapter, we present, first, Howson’s specific theses regarding the problem of induction; second, we criticize his interpretation of Hume, his objections to other approaches, and his own proposal; finally, we examine whether it is reasonable or not. We finish this master’s degree dissertation summarizing ours considerations. / FAPESP: 16/03251-2 e 16/25125-9