Conflicts of interest and industry professional relationships in psychiatric neurosurgery: a comparative literature review

A Scoping Review of Professionalism in Neurosurgery

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education's Milestones provides a foundation for professionalism in residency training. Specific professionalism concepts from neurosurgery could augment and expand milestones for the specialty. We reviewed the current literature and identified professionalism concepts within the context of neurosurgical practice and training.

METHODS

We used a scoping review methodology to search PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus and identify English-language articles with the search terms "professionalism" and "neurosurgery." We excluded articles that were not in English, not relevant to professionalism within neurosurgery, or could not be accessed. Non-peer-reviewed and qualitative publications, such as commentaries, were included in the review.

RESULTS

A total of 193 articles were included in the review. We identified 6 professionalism themes among these results: professional identity (n = 53), burnout and wellness (n = 51), professional development (n = 34), ethics and conflicts of interest (n = 27), diversity and gender (n = 19), and misconduct (n = 9).

CONCLUSION

These 6 concepts illustrate concerns that neurosurgeons have concerning professionalism. Diversity and gender, professional identity, and misconduct are not specifically addressed in the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education's Milestones. This review could be used to aid the development of organizational policy statements on professionalism.

Comparison of philosophical concerns between professionals and the public regarding two psychiatric treatments

BACKGROUND

Psychiatric interventions are a contested area in medicine, not only because of their history of abuses, but also because their therapeutic goal is to affect emotions, thoughts, beliefs, and behaviors that are regarded as pathological. Because psychiatric interventions affect characteristics that seem central to who we are, they raise issues regarding identity, autonomy, and personal responsibility for one's own well-being. Our study addresses two questions: (1) Do the public and academic researchers understand the philosophical stakes of these technologies in the same way? Following from this, (2) to what extent does the specific type of psychiatric technology affect the issues these two groups raise? This study compares how ethical issues regarding neurosurgical and pharmaceutical psychiatric interventions are discussed among the public and in the professional community of academic medicine and bioethics.

METHODS

We analyzed (1) online public comments and (2) the medical and bioethics literature, comparing the discussions of pharmacological and neurosurgical interventions in psychiatry in each source.

RESULTS

Overall, the public discussed philosophical issues less frequently than academics. For the two types of psychiatric interventions, we found differences between the academic literature and public comments among all themes, except for personal responsibility.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings reveal some of the similarities and discrepancies in how philosophical issues associated with psychiatric treatments are discussed in professional circles and among the public. Further research into what causes these discrepancies is crucial.