Associate Professor of Medical Ethics
Senior Lecturer in Medical Ethics
Ulrik Kihlbom is associate professor and senior lecturer in medical ethics at the Centre for Research Ethics & Bioethics. He is currently involved in a five-year project looking at how and when to include patient preferences in the life cycle of medical products (PREFER). He is also responsible for the Medical ethics & law program at the Medical school as well as for an advanced level course on public health ethics. In recent years, he has worked with bioethical issues related to reproduction, ethical particularism, family ethics and autonomy.
Phone: +46 18 471 6233
- Karin Schölin Bywall: The value of patient preferences in drug development for rheumatoid arthritis
- Ashkan Atry: Is Fair Play Compatible with Doping in Sport? (PhD 2013)
- Tove Godskesen: Factors associated with participation in phase1 and phase 3 oncology trials (PhD 2015)
Recently in the media
- Ansvar bör även läggas på forskningsledaren, Svenska Dagbladet Debatt, 16 March 2016
- Efter skandalen: ”Gråzoner sätt blanda bort korten”, Svenska Dagbladet Debatt, 10 March 2016
Managing genetic risk information
Research generates huge amounts of genetic information. How should we handle it? That is what we are trying to find out in a large international research project.
Giving patients a voice in drug development
PREFER is a five year public-private research project where academic researchers and the pharmaceutical industry work together to find out when and where patients want, can and should be involved in drug development
Particularism in bioethics
This network brings together theorists and practitioners from Philosophy, Psychology and Health Care.
We are part of an international network on ethics of families.
Karin Schölin Bywall will look at how rheumatoid arthritis patient preferences can provide added value in regulatory decision making in the drug development process.
Ethics & law for medical students
Students learn to analyze ethical and legal problems in medical practice and argue for their standpoint.
Public Health Ethics
Learn more about public health ethics! We offer a 7,5 credit course to advanced level students. You need to speak Swedish.
Ulrik Kihlbom on the Ethics Blog
How psychological distance of a study sample in discrete choice experiments affects preference measurement: a colorectal cancer screening case study
Part of Patient Preference and Adherence, p. 273-282, 2019.
Patient Perspectives on the Value of Patient Preference Information in Regulatory Decision Making: A Qualitative Study in Swedish Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis
Part of Patient, p. 297-305, 2019.
Understanding Patients' Preferences: A Systematic Review of Psychological Instruments Used in Patients' Preference and Decision Studies
Part of Value in Health, p. 491-501, 2019.
Compendium of methods for measuring patient preferences in medical treatment
Part of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, p. 517-518, 2018.
From Epigenetic Associations to Biological and Psychosocial Explanations in Mental Health.
Part of Progress in Molecular Biology and Translational Science, p. 299-323, 2018.
Genetic risk and value
Part of Journal of Risk Research, p. 222-235, 2018.
Giving patients' preferences a voice in the medical product lifecycle: why, when and how?: The public-private PREFER project: Work package 2
Part of ISPOR Value & Outcomes Spotlight, p. 19 19-21 21, 2018.
Patient-centered benefit-risk decision-making and the role of educational tools and psychological instruments in preference elicitation-Year 1 of IMI prefer
Part of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, p. 512-512, 2018.
Compendium Of Methods For Measuring Patient Preferences In Medical Treatment
Part of Value in Health, p. A684-A685, 2017.
"I have a lot of pills in my bag, you know": Institutional Norms in the Provision of Hope in Phase 1 Clinical Cancer Trials
Part of Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice, p. 679-682, 2017.
Medical ethics, decision-making and patient preferences
Health care and drug development raises several philosophical questions that require practical solutions: How can patients become informed enough to answer questions in a way that is meaningful? How do we make genetic risk information understandable and meaningful? Here, Ulrik Kihlbom reflects on what happens at the intersection of philosophy and empirical work.