scholarly journals Institute of Medical Ethics Guidelines for confirmation of appointment, promotion and recognition of UK bioethics and medical ethics researchers

2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 289-291
Author(s):  
Lucy Frith ◽  
Carwyn Hooper ◽  
Silvia Camporesi ◽  
Thomas Douglas ◽  
Anna Smajdor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Ethics ◽  
Detailed Analysis ◽  
Clinical Ethics ◽  
Peer Assessment ◽  
Ethics Consultation ◽  
Clinical Ethics Consultation ◽  
Policy Work ◽  
Disciplinary Background ◽  
Ethics Guidelines

This document is designed to give guidance on assessing researchers in bioethics/medical ethics. It is intended to assist members of selection, confirmation and promotion committees, who are required to assess those conducting bioethics research when they are not from a similar disciplinary background. It does not attempt to give guidance on the quality of bioethics research, as this is a matter for peer assessment. Rather it aims to give an indication of the type, scope and amount of research that is the expected in this field. It does not cover the assessment of other activities such as teaching, policy work, clinical ethics consultation and so on, but these will be mentioned for additional context. Although it mentions the UK’s Research Excellence Framework (REF), it is not intended to be a detailed analysis of the place of bioethics in the REF.

Quality Assessment of Clinical Ethics Consultation. Reflection on the Applicability of the Ethics Consultation Quality Assessment Tool

2021 ◽  
Vol 66 (Special Issue) ◽  
pp. 134-134
Author(s):  
Stephan Nadolny ◽  
◽  
Andre Nowak ◽  
Nicolas Heirich ◽  
Jan Schildmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Clinical Ethics ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Ethics Consultation ◽  
Process Quality ◽  
Ethical Analysis ◽  
Clinical Ethics Consultation ◽  
Quality Assessment Tool ◽  
Essential Components

"Background. Clinical ethics consultation has been implemented in many health care institutions. Different methods exist for their evaluation. In this paper we present findings from an evaluation of 21 documentation conducted 2019-2020 by means of the Ethics Consultation Quality Assessment Tool (ECQAT). The applicability of the instrument was analyzed based on a) duration of use, b) ease of use, c) comprehensibility of the items. Results. On average, the analysis with the ECQAT takes 11 minutes per protocol. The greatest difficulties in applying the ECQAT arise a) in assessing the counselling-related information and b) in assessing the ethical analysis as well as the recommendations. Here, different demands on the level of detail of the information may lead to different assessments. Furthermore, the transitions of the ethical analysis and the recommendations, which are relevant for the assessment, could not be delimited exactly in parts of the protocols. Discussion. The assessment of documentation represents a limited part of the quality of ethics consultation. In particular, the quality dimensions of the EQAT do not map communicative elements of process quality, which are essential components (if not the core) of ethics consultations. Moreover, the assessment is strongly depending on the format of the protocols, which, depending on the institution, range from a brief overview of the results to a detailed account. Even in light of aforementioned limitations the ECQAT provides an incentive to improve the process quality of (documented) ethics consultation. "

scholarly journals Development of Bioethics and Clinical Ethics in Bulgaria

Folia Medica ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 98-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silviya S. Aleksandrova-Yankulovska
Keyword(s):  
Medical Ethics ◽  
Clinical Ethics ◽  
Ethics Education ◽  
Ethics Consultation ◽  
Clinical Ethics Consultation ◽  
Medical Professionals ◽  
Clinical Settings ◽  
Choice Of Treatment ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Consultation Services

Abstract Background: Bioethics and clinical ethics emerged from the classical medical ethics in the 1970s of the 20th century. Both fields are new for the Bulgarian academic tradition. Aim: The aims of this paper were to demarcate the subject fields of medical ethics, bioethics, and clinical ethics, to present the developments in the field of medical ethics in Bulgaria, to delineate the obstacles to effective ethics education of medical professionals, and to present the results of the application of an adapted bottom-up methodology for clinical ethics consultation in several clinical units in Bulgaria. Materials and methods: Extended literature review and application of an adapted METAP methodology for clinical ethics consultation in six clinical units in the Northern Bulgaria between May 2013 and December 2014. Results: Teaching of medical ethics in Bulgaria was introduced in the 1990s and still stands mainly as theoretical expertise without sufficient dilemma training in clinical settings. Earlier studies revealed need of clinical ethics consultation services in our country. METAP methodology was applied in 69 ethics meetings. In 31.9% of them non-medical considerations affected the choice of treatment and 34.8% resulted in reaching consensus between the team and the patient. Participants’ opinion about the meetings was highly positive with 87.7% overall satisfaction. Conclusion: Development of bioethics in Bulgaria follows recent worldwide trends. Several ideas could be applied towards increasing the effectiveness of ethics education. Results of the ethics meetings lead to the conclusion that it is a successful and well accepted approach for clinical ethics consultation with a potential for wider introduction in our medical practice.

scholarly journals Introducing clinical ethics consultation service in Malaysia: A SWOT analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erwin Jiayuan Khoo ◽  
Siew Houy Chua ◽  
Meow-Keong Thong ◽  
Bin Alwi Zilfalil ◽  
John Lantos
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Ethics ◽  
Swot Analysis ◽  
Critical Mass ◽  
National Level ◽  
Ethics Consultation ◽  
Clinical Ethics Consultation ◽  
Cultural Barriers ◽  
Consultation Service ◽  
Insight Into

Clinical ethics consultation service remains undeveloped in developing countries. It is recognised that its introduction poses challenges. Malaysia, a multicultural society with diverse religions, values and perceptions further complicate the introduction of formal clinical ethics consultation service. Clinicians attending a national congress workshop completed a Strengths–Weaknesses–Opportunities–Threats analysis. The aim was to gain insight into clinician’s expectations and promote initiatives leading to the introduction of clinical ethics consultation service. Clinicians agree that clinical ethics consultation service can improve quality of care, reduce healthcare costs and advocate for patients and providers. The analysis highlighted constraints in sufficient critical mass of relevant expertise and restricted opportunities for training. The opportunities lie in education, curriculum development and availability of dedicated proponents. Cultural barriers, limited resources, lack of awareness, differences in opinions, fear of litigation and destructive influence of social media are seen as threats to the introduction of clinical ethics consultation service. This study illustrates the value of involving stakeholders when introducing clinical ethics consultation service formally. The issues identified will inform the strategic directions for the delivery of clinical ethics consultation service at a national level.

Response to “Paradigms for Clinical Ethics Consultation Practice” by Mark D. Fox, Glenn McGee, and Arthur L. Caplan (CQ Vol 7, No 3)

1999 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 351-357
Author(s):  
Edward Rudin
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Ethics ◽  
Ethics Consultation ◽  
Clinical Ethics Consultation

Fox, McGee, and Caplan's “Paradigms for Clinical Ethics Consultation Practice”, in the Summer 1998 issue of CQ, evoked memories and an image.

Race and Power at the Bedside: Counter Storytelling in Clinical Ethics Consultation

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 77-79
Author(s):  
Aleksandra E. Olszewski ◽  
Maya Scott ◽  
Arika Patneaude ◽  
Elliott M. Weiss ◽  
Aaron Wightman
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Ethics ◽  
Ethics Consultation ◽  
Clinical Ethics Consultation

An Ethics Expertise for Clinical Ethics Consultation

2011 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 649-661 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa M. Rasmussen
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Ethics ◽  
Professional Training ◽  
Ethics Consultation ◽  
Clinical Ethics Consultation ◽  
Moral Truth ◽  
List Type ◽  
Type Number ◽  
Moral Expertise ◽  
In Virtue Of ◽  
Ethics Expertise

A major obstacle to broad support of clinical ethics consultation (CEC) is suspicion regarding the nature of the moral expertise it claims to offer. The suspicion seems to be confirmed when the field fails to make its moral expertise explicit. In this vacuum, critics suggest the following:(1)Clinical ethics consultation's legitimacy depends on its ability to offer an expertise in moral matters.(2)Expertise in moral matters is knowledge of a singular moral truth which applies to everyone.(3)The claim that a clinical ethics consultant can offer knowledge of a singular moral truth in virtue of her professional training is absurd, false, or gravely immoral.Therefore,(4)The field is illegitimate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document