Patient autonomy: achieves relevance after 1953, with the publication of international normative documents on medical conduct and ethics in research. The patient’s decision regarding treatment is prioritized to the detriment of the professional’s will, if the patient’s life is not at risk as a result of this choice. |
Patient autonomy and rights: it was widely discussed in the journal as a fundamental part of medical ethics. It is argued that only individuals who are aware of all stages and possible adversities should participate in research; “consent” is understood as “trust in the researcher’s discretion”. |
Beneficence: respecting and doing good to the patient are guidelines for medical practice. Therefore, physicians are prohibited from carrying out procedures that harm their patients. |
Beneficence: it is perceived as one of the guiding principles of medical practice. No action by the physician should harm his patients, but cherish their well-being, respecting human life and dignity. |
Bioethics: in 1996 it is associated with the principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, and autonomy, which may be used as guidance to the medical practice. |
Bioethics: it is understood as an innovation in medicine, referring to the need for social, legal, and ethical standards to determine brain death. It could change conceptions and paradigms in which medicine was based in 1988. |
Ethics committees or commissions: instances to resolve complex ethical issues, avoiding abuse in research involving human beings. |
Ethics committees: they are associated with the need to regulate human subject research in Brazil, producing documents to support and standardize this type of study. |
Human dignity: implicit in some articles, it is understood as a moral imperative that must be respected by medical practices. |
Human dignity: widely disseminated, it is understood that it is the physician’s role to care for the well-being of the patient, respecting ethical, moral values, human rights, as well as local and international laws. |
Human rights: they are presented in a tenuous way when dealing with patients’ rights, and mainly life. |
Human rights: published in numerous articles, which include documents such as the UDHR and the Declaration of Helsinki in full, to reinforce their guiding role not only in the medical act but also in all daily practices. |
Health education: much discussed in the first decades of publication, it covers topics such as hygiene and public health. It appears as an attempt to make the population aware of the importance of hygiene, and thus contribute to reducing the spread of diseases. |
Health education and hygiene: they were not addressed by the journal. |
Medical ethics: from 1953, it is perceived as a set of values and moral principles that must guide the physician in the life and exercise of his profession. |
Medical ethics: frequently published subject. It is understood as the physician’s duty to act per moral and ethical values, as well as with current legislation. The professional must respect human dignity and the patient’s will while caring for their well-being. |
Eugenics: approached from the hygienist and sanitary bias, with the engagement of physicians in the improvement of the life of the population. It was brought up in articles until the 1950s. |
Eugenics: subject of a 1984 article warning about the risks of genetic selection. The text argues that eliminating genes can also mean eliminating people. |
Human subject research: not addressed explicitly in the articles but approached in a tenuous way in the Medical Codes of Ethics. |
Human subject research: a well-published subject, seeking international contributions and regulations to build national regulatory instruments and create Ethics Committees. It is the physician’s role, in his research, to care for the patient’s well-being, respecting ethical values, human rights, human dignity, and aiming at improvements that benefit the population. |