Cargando…

In pursuit of goodness in bioethics: analysis of an exemplary article

BACKGROUND: What is good bioethics? Addressing this question is key for reinforcing and developing the field. In particular, a discussion of potential quality criteria can heighten awareness and contribute to the quality of bioethics publications. Accordingly, the objective of this article is threef...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hofmann, Bjørn, Magelssen, Morten
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6003140/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29902999
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-018-0299-9
_version_ 1783332315864236032
author Hofmann, Bjørn
Magelssen, Morten
author_facet Hofmann, Bjørn
Magelssen, Morten
author_sort Hofmann, Bjørn
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: What is good bioethics? Addressing this question is key for reinforcing and developing the field. In particular, a discussion of potential quality criteria can heighten awareness and contribute to the quality of bioethics publications. Accordingly, the objective of this article is threefold: first, we want to identify a set of criteria for quality in bioethics. Second, we want to illustrate the added value of a novel method: in-depth analysis of a single article with the aim of deriving quality criteria. The third and ultimate goal is to stimulate a broad and vivid debate on goodness in bioethics. METHODS: An initial literature search reveals a range of diverse quality criteria. In order to expand on the realm of such quality criteria, we perform an in-depth analysis of an article that is acclaimed for being exemplary. RESULTS: The analysis results in eleven specific quality criteria for good bioethics in three categories: argumentative, empirical, and dialectic. Although we do not claim that the identified criteria are universal or absolute, we argue that they are fruitful for fueling a continuous constitutive debate on what is “good bioethics.” CONCLUSION: Identifying, debating, refining, and applying such criteria is an important part of defining and improving bioethics. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12910-018-0299-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6003140
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60031402018-07-06 In pursuit of goodness in bioethics: analysis of an exemplary article Hofmann, Bjørn Magelssen, Morten BMC Med Ethics Research Article BACKGROUND: What is good bioethics? Addressing this question is key for reinforcing and developing the field. In particular, a discussion of potential quality criteria can heighten awareness and contribute to the quality of bioethics publications. Accordingly, the objective of this article is threefold: first, we want to identify a set of criteria for quality in bioethics. Second, we want to illustrate the added value of a novel method: in-depth analysis of a single article with the aim of deriving quality criteria. The third and ultimate goal is to stimulate a broad and vivid debate on goodness in bioethics. METHODS: An initial literature search reveals a range of diverse quality criteria. In order to expand on the realm of such quality criteria, we perform an in-depth analysis of an article that is acclaimed for being exemplary. RESULTS: The analysis results in eleven specific quality criteria for good bioethics in three categories: argumentative, empirical, and dialectic. Although we do not claim that the identified criteria are universal or absolute, we argue that they are fruitful for fueling a continuous constitutive debate on what is “good bioethics.” CONCLUSION: Identifying, debating, refining, and applying such criteria is an important part of defining and improving bioethics. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12910-018-0299-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-06-15 /pmc/articles/PMC6003140/ /pubmed/29902999 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-018-0299-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hofmann, Bjørn
Magelssen, Morten
In pursuit of goodness in bioethics: analysis of an exemplary article
title In pursuit of goodness in bioethics: analysis of an exemplary article
title_full In pursuit of goodness in bioethics: analysis of an exemplary article
title_fullStr In pursuit of goodness in bioethics: analysis of an exemplary article
title_full_unstemmed In pursuit of goodness in bioethics: analysis of an exemplary article
title_short In pursuit of goodness in bioethics: analysis of an exemplary article
title_sort in pursuit of goodness in bioethics: analysis of an exemplary article
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6003140/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29902999
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-018-0299-9
work_keys_str_mv AT hofmannbjørn inpursuitofgoodnessinbioethicsanalysisofanexemplaryarticle
AT magelssenmorten inpursuitofgoodnessinbioethicsanalysisofanexemplaryarticle