CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 25Public Health Policies and EducationEthics and bioethics in healthcareGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology

Foundational values for public health

Open access
Lee, Lisa M, Zarowsky, Christina·2015·Public Health Reviews
DOI 10.1186/s40985-015-0004-1PMC PMC5809907
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The development of an agreed-upon set of foundational ethical values for the field of public health is ongoing. In this paper we outline key elements of recent convergence on some basic moral precepts that drive public health. We suggest that three elements are particularly useful for anchoring public health practitioners' reflections on public health ethics: 1) the notions of "common" and "professional" morality, 2) an understanding of the practice and content of modern public health and especially its practical, solution-focused orientation, and 3) an appreciation of the history of public health as integrally linked to evolving and contested views of the relationship between citizens, science, and the state. There is broad agreement that governments are stewards of their populations and are responsible for providing conditions that allow for its members to be healthy and productive. Given the role of policy and government in public health, the role of political philosophy likely has a substantial place as we seek a coherent system of ethical justification in our work. The aim here is not to align with one theoretical approach or another, rather, to consider the foundational values of public health practice order to identify the common moral governance of our work. Our profession's morality-the set of norms shared by all public health professionals-is determined by what public health is and what we think it should be. As our aspirations for public health evolve, it is incumbent upon us to engage in reflective discourse to reach a new equilibrium about our moral foundation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s40985-015-0004-1

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The field of public health ethics is still evolving.

    “Although the integration of public health ethics principles as part of medical AI ethics offers a comprehensive approach for teaching AI ethics in the medical setting, it is important to recognize that the field of public health ethics is still evolving [72].”

    From Proposing a Principle-Based Approach for Teaching AI Ethics in Medical Education (2024) · cites this paper as [72]

  • Public health ethics principles such as efficiency, common good orientation, and proportionality are not universally agreed upon or applied consistently across different contexts.

    “Unlike the well-established principles of medical ethics proposed by Beauchamp and Childress [34], public health ethics principles such as efficiency, common good orientation, and proportionality are not universally agreed upon or applied consistently across different contexts.”

    From Proposing a Principle-Based Approach for Teaching AI Ethics in Medical Education (2024) · cites this paper as [72]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [3]Beauchamp TL Childress JF Principles of biomedical ethics, sixth ed 2009 New York, NY Oxford University Press
  2. [8]The Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada. Chapter 4: Basic Concepts in Prevention, Surveillance, and Health Promotion. In: AFMC Primer on Population Health: A virtual textbook on Public Health concepts for clinicians. Available from URL: http://phprimer.afmc.ca/Part1-TheoryThinkingAboutHealth/Chapter4BasicConceptsInPreventionSurveillanceAndHealthPromotion/Thestagesofprevention. (Accessed May 15, 2015).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lee, L. M., & Zarowsky, C.
Affiliations
Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal (CA)
Corresponding author
Lee, Lisa M
ORCID
Venue
Public Health Reviews
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2015-05-29
Volume
36
Issue
1
Pages
2-2
ISSN
  • 0301-0422 (ISSN-L)
  • 2107-6952
DOI
10.1186/s40985-015-0004-1
PMC
PMC5809907
OpenAlex
W1903074968
Cited by
25
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
FWCI
0.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Public health reviews (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Keywords
public health ethics, professional ethics, common morality, political philosophy, history of public health, science and the state, public health policy, moral justification

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review