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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |