Cargando…

Standards of practice in empirical bioethics research: towards a consensus

BACKGROUND: This paper reports the process and outcome of a consensus finding project, which began with a meeting at the Brocher Foundation in May 2015. The project sought to generate and reach consensus on standards of practice for Empirical Bioethics research. The project involved 16 academics fro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ives, Jonathan, Dunn, Michael, Molewijk, Bert, Schildmann, Jan, Bærøe, Kristine, Frith, Lucy, Huxtable, Richard, Landeweer, Elleke, Mertz, Marcel, Provoost, Veerle, Rid, Annette, Salloch, Sabine, Sheehan, Mark, Strech, Daniel, de Vries, Martine, Widdershoven, Guy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6038185/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29986689
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-018-0304-3
_version_ 1783338445001719808
author Ives, Jonathan
Dunn, Michael
Molewijk, Bert
Schildmann, Jan
Bærøe, Kristine
Frith, Lucy
Huxtable, Richard
Landeweer, Elleke
Mertz, Marcel
Provoost, Veerle
Rid, Annette
Salloch, Sabine
Sheehan, Mark
Strech, Daniel
de Vries, Martine
Widdershoven, Guy
author_facet Ives, Jonathan
Dunn, Michael
Molewijk, Bert
Schildmann, Jan
Bærøe, Kristine
Frith, Lucy
Huxtable, Richard
Landeweer, Elleke
Mertz, Marcel
Provoost, Veerle
Rid, Annette
Salloch, Sabine
Sheehan, Mark
Strech, Daniel
de Vries, Martine
Widdershoven, Guy
author_sort Ives, Jonathan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This paper reports the process and outcome of a consensus finding project, which began with a meeting at the Brocher Foundation in May 2015. The project sought to generate and reach consensus on standards of practice for Empirical Bioethics research. The project involved 16 academics from 5 different European Countries, with a range of disciplinary backgrounds. METHODS: The consensus process used a modified Delphi approach. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 15 standards of practice, organised into 6 domains of research practice (Aims, Questions, Integration, Conduct of Empirical Work, Conduct of Normative Work; Training & Expertise). CONCLUSIONS: Through articulating these standards we outline a position that encourages responses, and through those responses we will be able to identify points of agreement and contestation that will drive the conversation forward. In that vein, we would encourage researchers, funders and journals to engage with what we have proposed, and respond to us, so that our community of practice of empirical bioethics research can develop and evolve further.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6038185
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60381852018-07-12 Standards of practice in empirical bioethics research: towards a consensus Ives, Jonathan Dunn, Michael Molewijk, Bert Schildmann, Jan Bærøe, Kristine Frith, Lucy Huxtable, Richard Landeweer, Elleke Mertz, Marcel Provoost, Veerle Rid, Annette Salloch, Sabine Sheehan, Mark Strech, Daniel de Vries, Martine Widdershoven, Guy BMC Med Ethics Research Article BACKGROUND: This paper reports the process and outcome of a consensus finding project, which began with a meeting at the Brocher Foundation in May 2015. The project sought to generate and reach consensus on standards of practice for Empirical Bioethics research. The project involved 16 academics from 5 different European Countries, with a range of disciplinary backgrounds. METHODS: The consensus process used a modified Delphi approach. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 15 standards of practice, organised into 6 domains of research practice (Aims, Questions, Integration, Conduct of Empirical Work, Conduct of Normative Work; Training & Expertise). CONCLUSIONS: Through articulating these standards we outline a position that encourages responses, and through those responses we will be able to identify points of agreement and contestation that will drive the conversation forward. In that vein, we would encourage researchers, funders and journals to engage with what we have proposed, and respond to us, so that our community of practice of empirical bioethics research can develop and evolve further. BioMed Central 2018-07-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6038185/ /pubmed/29986689 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-018-0304-3 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
Ives, Jonathan
Dunn, Michael
Molewijk, Bert
Schildmann, Jan
Bærøe, Kristine
Frith, Lucy
Huxtable, Richard
Landeweer, Elleke
Mertz, Marcel
Provoost, Veerle
Rid, Annette
Salloch, Sabine
Sheehan, Mark
Strech, Daniel
de Vries, Martine
Widdershoven, Guy
Standards of practice in empirical bioethics research: towards a consensus
title Standards of practice in empirical bioethics research: towards a consensus
title_full Standards of practice in empirical bioethics research: towards a consensus
title_fullStr Standards of practice in empirical bioethics research: towards a consensus
title_full_unstemmed Standards of practice in empirical bioethics research: towards a consensus
title_short Standards of practice in empirical bioethics research: towards a consensus
title_sort standards of practice in empirical bioethics research: towards a consensus
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6038185/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29986689
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-018-0304-3
work_keys_str_mv AT ivesjonathan standardsofpracticeinempiricalbioethicsresearchtowardsaconsensus
AT dunnmichael standardsofpracticeinempiricalbioethicsresearchtowardsaconsensus
AT molewijkbert standardsofpracticeinempiricalbioethicsresearchtowardsaconsensus
AT schildmannjan standardsofpracticeinempiricalbioethicsresearchtowardsaconsensus
AT bærøekristine standardsofpracticeinempiricalbioethicsresearchtowardsaconsensus
AT frithlucy standardsofpracticeinempiricalbioethicsresearchtowardsaconsensus
AT huxtablerichard standardsofpracticeinempiricalbioethicsresearchtowardsaconsensus
AT landeweerelleke standardsofpracticeinempiricalbioethicsresearchtowardsaconsensus
AT mertzmarcel standardsofpracticeinempiricalbioethicsresearchtowardsaconsensus
AT provoostveerle standardsofpracticeinempiricalbioethicsresearchtowardsaconsensus
AT ridannette standardsofpracticeinempiricalbioethicsresearchtowardsaconsensus
AT sallochsabine standardsofpracticeinempiricalbioethicsresearchtowardsaconsensus
AT sheehanmark standardsofpracticeinempiricalbioethicsresearchtowardsaconsensus
AT strechdaniel standardsofpracticeinempiricalbioethicsresearchtowardsaconsensus
AT devriesmartine standardsofpracticeinempiricalbioethicsresearchtowardsaconsensus
AT widdershovenguy standardsofpracticeinempiricalbioethicsresearchtowardsaconsensus