Key result
Editorial contrasts utilitarian and deontological frameworks in cardiovascular disease primary prevention.
Why the study?
Cardiovascular mortality and morbidity remain major health problems despite vast investments in preventive medical intervention strategies over the last 20-30 years.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports ongoing CVD prevention investment; leaves open optimal individual risk stratification strategies.
Heart diseases and cerebrovascular diseases rank among the top causes of death as well as years of potential life lost in the United States (Table I) and Western Europe (1-3).From the perspective of public health policy, cardiovascular mortality and morbidity have been identified as a major health problem and vast investments in money and manpower have been made over the last 20-30 years in order to develop population as well as individual preventive medical intervention strategies (2, 4).From a clinical point of view, epidemiological T Hedner and L.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hedner et al. (1988) conducted an editorial in Cardiovascular disease. Primary prevention strategies was evaluated. This article discusses utilitarian versus deontological approaches to the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease from public health and clinical perspectives.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: