Cargando…
Defining ethical challenge(s) in healthcare research: a rapid review
BACKGROUND: Despite its ubiquity in academic research, the phrase ‘ethical challenge(s)’ appears to lack an agreed definition. A lack of a definition risks introducing confusion or avoidable bias. Conceptual clarity is a key component of research, both theoretical and empirical. Using a rapid review...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8479723/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34587950 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00700-9 |
_version_ | 1784576319970869248 |
---|---|
author | Schofield, Guy Dittborn, Mariana Selman, Lucy Ellen Huxtable, Richard |
author_facet | Schofield, Guy Dittborn, Mariana Selman, Lucy Ellen Huxtable, Richard |
author_sort | Schofield, Guy |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Despite its ubiquity in academic research, the phrase ‘ethical challenge(s)’ appears to lack an agreed definition. A lack of a definition risks introducing confusion or avoidable bias. Conceptual clarity is a key component of research, both theoretical and empirical. Using a rapid review methodology, we sought to review definitions of ‘ethical challenge(s)’ and closely related terms as used in current healthcare research literature. METHODS: Rapid review to identify peer-reviewed reports examining ‘ethical challenge(s)’ in any context, extracting data on definitions of ‘ethical challenge(s)’ in use, and synonymous use of closely related terms in the general manuscript text. Data were analysed using content analysis. Four databases (MEDLINE, Philosopher’s Index, EMBASE, CINAHL) were searched from April 2016 to April 2021. RESULTS: 393 records were screened, with 72 studies eligible and included: 53 empirical studies, 17 structured reviews and 2 review protocols. 12/72 (17%) contained an explicit definition of ‘ethical challenge(s), two of which were shared, resulting in 11 unique definitions. Within these 11 definitions, four approaches were identified: definition through concepts; reference to moral conflict, moral uncertainty or difficult choices; definition by participants; and challenges linked to emotional or moral distress. Each definition contained one or more of these approaches, but none contained all four. 68/72 (94%) included studies used terms closely related to synonymously refer to ‘ethical challenge(s)’ within their manuscript text, with 32 different terms identified and between one and eight different terms mentioned per study. CONCLUSIONS: Only 12/72 studies contained an explicit definition of ‘ethical challenge(s)’, with significant variety in scope and complexity. This variation risks confusion and biasing data analysis and results, reducing confidence in research findings. Further work on establishing acceptable definitional content is needed to inform future bioethics research. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8479723 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84797232021-09-30 Defining ethical challenge(s) in healthcare research: a rapid review Schofield, Guy Dittborn, Mariana Selman, Lucy Ellen Huxtable, Richard BMC Med Ethics Research BACKGROUND: Despite its ubiquity in academic research, the phrase ‘ethical challenge(s)’ appears to lack an agreed definition. A lack of a definition risks introducing confusion or avoidable bias. Conceptual clarity is a key component of research, both theoretical and empirical. Using a rapid review methodology, we sought to review definitions of ‘ethical challenge(s)’ and closely related terms as used in current healthcare research literature. METHODS: Rapid review to identify peer-reviewed reports examining ‘ethical challenge(s)’ in any context, extracting data on definitions of ‘ethical challenge(s)’ in use, and synonymous use of closely related terms in the general manuscript text. Data were analysed using content analysis. Four databases (MEDLINE, Philosopher’s Index, EMBASE, CINAHL) were searched from April 2016 to April 2021. RESULTS: 393 records were screened, with 72 studies eligible and included: 53 empirical studies, 17 structured reviews and 2 review protocols. 12/72 (17%) contained an explicit definition of ‘ethical challenge(s), two of which were shared, resulting in 11 unique definitions. Within these 11 definitions, four approaches were identified: definition through concepts; reference to moral conflict, moral uncertainty or difficult choices; definition by participants; and challenges linked to emotional or moral distress. Each definition contained one or more of these approaches, but none contained all four. 68/72 (94%) included studies used terms closely related to synonymously refer to ‘ethical challenge(s)’ within their manuscript text, with 32 different terms identified and between one and eight different terms mentioned per study. CONCLUSIONS: Only 12/72 studies contained an explicit definition of ‘ethical challenge(s)’, with significant variety in scope and complexity. This variation risks confusion and biasing data analysis and results, reducing confidence in research findings. Further work on establishing acceptable definitional content is needed to inform future bioethics research. BioMed Central 2021-09-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8479723/ /pubmed/34587950 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00700-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Schofield, Guy Dittborn, Mariana Selman, Lucy Ellen Huxtable, Richard Defining ethical challenge(s) in healthcare research: a rapid review |
title | Defining ethical challenge(s) in healthcare research: a rapid review |
title_full | Defining ethical challenge(s) in healthcare research: a rapid review |
title_fullStr | Defining ethical challenge(s) in healthcare research: a rapid review |
title_full_unstemmed | Defining ethical challenge(s) in healthcare research: a rapid review |
title_short | Defining ethical challenge(s) in healthcare research: a rapid review |
title_sort | defining ethical challenge(s) in healthcare research: a rapid review |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8479723/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34587950 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00700-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT schofieldguy definingethicalchallengesinhealthcareresearcharapidreview AT dittbornmariana definingethicalchallengesinhealthcareresearcharapidreview AT selmanlucyellen definingethicalchallengesinhealthcareresearcharapidreview AT huxtablerichard definingethicalchallengesinhealthcareresearcharapidreview |