Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Publication year range
4.
Article in German | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35380241

ABSTRACT

Regulatory scientific agencies, such as the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), are confronted with various challenges in their science-based risk communication. On the one hand, the communication of health risks is becoming increasingly complex and, accordingly, more demanding, which is why - among other things - questions about the health literacy of consumers and target group-oriented risk communication are gaining importance. On the other hand, the outputs of regulatory scientific agencies are increasingly exposed to politicisation and public criticism, which increases the relevance of questions about the objectivity and trustworthiness of expert opinion, risk assessment, and official statements, as well as the legitimacy and reputation of such organisations. This is further intensified by the emergence of new social media actors who produce and publish their own information and communication materials. The misinformation, disinformation and malinformation consequently distributed in this context represent another challenge, which is closely related to questions of adequate communication of health risks and of stabilising legitimacy, reputation and trustworthiness.The article discusses various approaches to solving these problems, including the optimization and visual enhancement of health information, enabling social participation as well as embedding these measures in strategic stakeholder and reputation management. The article concludes with a call for a more open discussion of inherent dilemmas.


Subject(s)
Academies and Institutes , Communication , Germany , Humans , Policy , Risk Assessment
9.
Int J Clin Pract Suppl ; (152): 1-26, 2007 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17206953

ABSTRACT

These Best Practice Guidelines on Publication Ethics describe Blackwell Publishing's position on the major ethical principles of academic publishing and review factors that may foster ethical behavior or create problems. The aims are to encourage discussion, to initiate changes where they are needed, and to provide practical guidance, in the form of Best Practice statements, to inform these changes. Blackwell Publishing recommends that editors adapt and adopt the suggestions outlined to best fit the needs of their own particular publishing environment.


Subject(s)
Publishing/ethics , Research Support as Topic/ethics , Authorship , Clinical Trials as Topic/ethics , Codes of Ethics , Commerce/ethics , Confidentiality/ethics , Conflict of Interest , Culture , Disclosure/ethics , Editorial Policies , Ethics, Professional , Peer Review, Research/ethics , Periodicals as Topic/ethics , Publishing/economics , Retraction of Publication as Topic , Scientific Misconduct/ethics , Social Responsibility , Time Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...