Routine circumcision of infant boys: It's time to make progress through the common ground

Jansen, Melanie

doi:10.1111/jpc.13224

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A defence by the chair of RACP committee was repudiated . Arguments by another commentator were also criticized . Guidance by the British Medical Association failed to involve a review of the medical literature and thus cannot be relied on .…”

Section: Physical Harmmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Critical evaluation of arguments opposing male circumcision: A systematic review

Morris

Moreton²,

Krieger

2019

J Evidence Based Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To systematically evaluate evidence against male circumcision (MC). Methods We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE and Cochrane databases. Results Database searches retrieved 297 publications for inclusion. Bibliographies of these yielded 101 more. After evaluation we found: Claims that MC carries high risk were contradicted by low frequency of adverse events that were virtually all minor and easily treated with complete resolution. Claims that MC causes psychological harm were contradicted by studies finding no such harm. Claims that MC impairs sexual function and pleasure were contradicted by high‐quality studies finding no adverse effect. Claims disputing the medical benefits of MC were contradicted by a large body of high‐quality evidence indicating protection against a wide range of infections, dermatological conditions, and genital cancers in males and the female sexual partners of men. Risk‐benefit analyses reported that benefits exceed risks by 100‐200 to 1. To maximize benefits and minimize risks, the evidence supported early infant MC rather than arguments that the procedure should be delayed until males are old enough to decide for themselves. Claims that MC of minors is unethical were contradicted by balanced evaluations of ethical issues supporting the rights of children to be provided with low‐risk, high‐benefit interventions such as MC for better health. Expert evaluations of case‐law supported the legality of MC of minors. Other data demonstrated that early infant MC is cost‐saving to health systems. Conclusions Arguments opposing MC are supported mostly by low‐quality evidence and opinion, and are contradicted by strong scientific evidence.

show abstract

Section: Physical Harmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…415 A defence by the chair of RACP committee 185 was repudiated. 416 Arguments by another commentator 417 were also criticized. 418…”

Section: Us and Non-us Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical evaluation of arguments opposing male circumcision: A systematic review

Morris

Moreton²,

Krieger

2019

J Evidence Based Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A recent article on 'routine' infant male circumcision (IMC) 1 argues that the debate about IMC is stuck and that it is time the polarised belligerents compromise down the middle. … But how realistic is that?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Infant circumcision: Evidence, policy, and practice

Wodak

Ziegler

Morris

2017

J Paediatrics Child Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Unlike many previous reviews, the 2012 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) adopted a meticulous policy process and carefully reviewed the evidence. 2 It stated that benefits exceed risks, so justifying access, recommended accurate, unbiased scientific information for parents to help in their decision, it be performed by trained, competent practitioners using sterile techniques and effective pain management, and that 'the preventive and public health benefits associated with newborn IMC warrant third-party reimbursement'. 2 This milestone in the long-running debate was soon followed by similar draft recommendations by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which reported benefits exceed risks by 100 to 1.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%