1
|
Ursin F, Müller R, Funer F, Liedtke W, Renz D, Wiertz S, Ranisch R. Non-empirical methods for ethics research on digital technologies in medicine, health care and public health: a systematic journal review. MEDICINE, HEALTH CARE, AND PHILOSOPHY 2024:10.1007/s11019-024-10222-x. [PMID: 39120780 DOI: 10.1007/s11019-024-10222-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/27/2024] [Indexed: 08/10/2024]
Abstract
Bioethics has developed approaches to address ethical issues in health care, similar to how technology ethics provides guidelines for ethical research on artificial intelligence, big data, and robotic applications. As these digital technologies are increasingly used in medicine, health care and public health, thus, it is plausible that the approaches of technology ethics have influenced bioethical research. Similar to the "empirical turn" in bioethics, which led to intense debates about appropriate moral theories, ethical frameworks and meta-ethics due to the increased use of empirical methodologies from social sciences, the proliferation of health-related subtypes of technology ethics might have a comparable impact on current bioethical research. This systematic journal review analyses the reporting of ethical frameworks and non-empirical methods in argument-based research articles on digital technologies in medicine, health care and public health that have been published in high-impact bioethics journals. We focus on articles reporting non-empirical research in original contributions. Our aim is to describe currently used methods for the ethical analysis of ethical issues regarding the application of digital technologies in medicine, health care and public health. We confine our analysis to non-empirical methods because empirical methods have been well-researched elsewhere. Finally, we discuss our findings against the background of established methods for health technology assessment, the lack of a typology for non-empirical methods as well as conceptual and methodical change in bioethics. Our descriptive results may serve as a starting point for reflecting on whether current ethical frameworks and non-empirical methods are appropriate to research ethical issues deriving from the application of digital technologies in medicine, health care and public health.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Frank Ursin
- Institute for Ethics, History and Philosophy of Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Strasse 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
| | - Regina Müller
- Institute of Philosophy, University of Bremen, Enrique-Schmidt-Straße 7, 28359, Bremen, Germany
| | - Florian Funer
- Institute for Ethics and History of Medicine, Eberhard Karls University, Gartenstrasse 47, 72074, Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Wenke Liedtke
- Faculty of Theology, University of Greifswald, Am Rubenowplatz 2-3, 17489, Greifswald, Germany
| | - David Renz
- Faculty of Protestant Theology, University of Bonn, Am Hofgarten 8, 53113, Bonn, Germany
| | - Svenja Wiertz
- Department of Medical Ethics and the History of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Stefan-Meier-Str. 26, 79104, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Robert Ranisch
- Junior Professorship for Medical Ethics with a Focus on Digitization, Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, University of Potsdam, Am Mühlenberg 9, 14476, Potsdam, Golm, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wangmo T, Provoost V, Mihailov E. The Vagueness of Integrating the Empirical and the Normative: Researchers' Views on Doing Empirical Bioethics. JOURNAL OF BIOETHICAL INQUIRY 2024; 21:295-308. [PMID: 37938498 PMCID: PMC11288993 DOI: 10.1007/s11673-023-10286-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2023] [Accepted: 07/20/2023] [Indexed: 11/09/2023]
Abstract
The integration of normative analysis with empirical data often remains unclear despite the availability of many empirical bioethics methodologies. This paper sought bioethics scholars' experiences and reflections of doing empirical bioethics research to feed these practical insights into the debate on methods. We interviewed twenty-six participants who revealed their process of integrating the normative and the empirical. From the analysis of the data, we first used the themes to identify the methodological content. That is, we show participants' use of familiar methods explained as "back-and-forth" methods (reflective equilibrium), followed by dialogical methods where collaboration was seen as a better way of doing integration. Thereafter, we highlight methods that were deemed as inherent integration approaches, where the normative and the empirical were intertwined from the start of the research project. Second, we used the themes to express not only how we interpreted what was said but also how things were said. In this, we describe an air of uncertainty and overall vagueness that surrounded the above methods. We conclude that the indeterminacy of integration methods is a double-edged sword. It allows for flexibility but also risks obscuring a lack of understanding of the theoretical-methodological underpinnings of empirical bioethics research methods.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T Wangmo
- Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
| | - V Provoost
- Bioethics Institute Ghent, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - E Mihailov
- Research Centre in Applied Ethics, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Bucharest, București, Romania
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Mitchell P, Cribb A, Entwistle V. Truth and consequences. METAPHILOSOPHY 2023; 54:523-538. [PMID: 38230408 PMCID: PMC10790633 DOI: 10.1111/meta.12644] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/18/2024]
Abstract
In his 1987 paper "Truth or Consequences," Dan Brock describes a deep conflict between the goals and virtues of philosophical scholarship and public policymaking: whereas the former is concerned with the search for truth, the latter must primarily be concerned with promoting good consequences. When philosophers are engaged in policymaking, he argues, they must shift their primary goal from truth to consequences-but this has both moral and methodological costs. Brock's argument exemplifies a pessimistic, but not uncommon, view of the possible shape and nature of applied philosophy. The present paper paints a richer and more optimistic picture. It argues that the difference between theoretical philosophy and applied philosophy is not best understood as a choice between truth and consequences. On the contrary, applied philosophers engage in forms of truth-seeking that are properly concerned with consequences-including the consequences of philosophical practice itself.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Polly Mitchell
- Centre for Public Policy ResearchKing's College LondonUnited Kingdom
| | - Alan Cribb
- Centre for Public Policy ResearchKing's College LondonUnited Kingdom
| | - Vikki Entwistle
- Health Services Research Unit and Department of PhilosophyUniversity of AberdeenUnited Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Mihailov E, Provoost V, Wangmo T. Acceptable objectives of empirical research in bioethics: a qualitative exploration of researchers' views. BMC Med Ethics 2022; 23:140. [PMID: 36575520 PMCID: PMC9794471 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-022-00845-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2022] [Accepted: 10/19/2022] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This is the first qualitative study to investigate how researchers, who do empirical work in bioethics, relate to objectives of empirical research in bioethics (ERiB). We explore reasons that make some objectives more acceptable, while others are deemed less acceptable. METHODS Using qualitative exploratory study design, we interviewed bioethics researchers, who were selected to represent different types of scholars working in the field. The interview data of 25 participants were analyzed in this paper using thematic analysis. RESULTS From the eight objectives presented to the study participants, understanding the context of a bioethical issue and identifying ethical issues in practice received unanimous agreement. Participants also supported other objectives of ERiB but with varying degrees of agreement. The most contested objectives were striving to draw normative recommendations and developing and justifying moral principles. The is-ought gap was not considered an obstacle to ERiB, but rather a warning sign to critically reflect on the normative implications of empirical results. CONCLUSIONS Our results show that the most contested objectives are also the more ambitious ones, whereas the least contested ones focus on producing empirical results. The potential of empirical research to be useful for bioethics was mostly based on the reasoning pattern that empirical data can provide a testing ground for elements of normative theory. Even though empirical research can inform many parts of bioethical inquiry, normative expertise is recommended to guide ERiB. The acceptability of ambitious objectives for ERiB boils down to finding firm ground for the integration of empirical facts in normative inquiry.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emilian Mihailov
- grid.5100.40000 0001 2322 497XFaculty of Philosophy, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Veerle Provoost
- grid.5342.00000 0001 2069 7798Bioethics Institute Ghent, University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Tenzin Wangmo
- grid.6612.30000 0004 1937 0642Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
De Panfilis L, Magelssen M, Costantini M, Ghirotto L, Artioli G, Turola E, Perin M. Research, education, ethics consultation: evaluating a Bioethics Unit in an Oncological Research Hospital. BMC Med Ethics 2022; 23:133. [PMID: 36494709 PMCID: PMC9733101 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-022-00863-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2022] [Accepted: 11/21/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study aims to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate the activities of a Bioethics Unit (BU) 5 years since its implementation (2016-2020). The BU is a research unit providing empirical research on ethical issues related to clinical practice, clinical ethics consultation, and ethical education for health care professionals (HPS). METHODS We performed an explanatory, sequential, mixed-method, observational study, using the subsequent qualitative data to explain the initial quantitative findings. Quantitative data were collected from an internal database and analyzed by descriptive analysis. Qualitative evaluation was performed by semi-structured interviews with 18 HPs who were differently involved in the BU's activities and analyzed by framework analysis. RESULTS Quantitative results showed an extensive increment of the number of BU research projects over the years and the number of work collaborations with other units and wards. Qualitative findings revealed four main themes, concerning: 1. the reasons for contacting the BU and the type of collaboration; 2. the role of the bioethicist; 3. the impact of BU activities on HPs, in terms of developing deeper and more mature thinking; 4. the need to extend ethics support to other settings. Overall, our results showed that performing both empirical bioethics research and more traditional clinical ethics activities at the same unit would produce an impetus to increase collaboration and spread an 'ethical culture' among local HPs. CONCLUSIONS Our findings contribute to a growing body of literature on the models of clinical ethics support services and the role of empirical research in bioethics internationally. They also prepare the ground for the implementation of a multidisciplinary Clinical Ethics Committee (CEC) that aims to support the BU's ethics consultation service within the local context.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Morten Magelssen
- grid.5510.10000 0004 1936 8921Centre for Medical Ethics, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Massimo Costantini
- Scientific Directorate, Azienda USL-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - Luca Ghirotto
- Qualitative Research Unit, Azienda USL-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - Giovanna Artioli
- grid.10383.390000 0004 1758 0937Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy
| | - Elena Turola
- Scientific Directorate, Azienda USL-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - Marta Perin
- Bioethics Unit, Azienda USL-IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy ,grid.7548.e0000000121697570PhD Program in Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Roest B, Milota M, Leget C. Developing new ways to listen: the value of narrative approaches in empirical (bio)ethics. BMC Med Ethics 2021; 22:124. [PMID: 34530832 PMCID: PMC8447625 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-021-00691-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2021] [Accepted: 08/31/2021] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
The use of qualitative research in empirical bioethics is becoming increasingly popular, but its implementation comes with several challenges, such as difficulties in aligning moral epistemology and methods. In this paper, we describe some problems that empirical bioethics researchers may face; these problems are related to a tension between the different poles on the spectrum of scientific paradigms, namely a positivist and interpretive stance. We explore the ideas of narrative construction, ‘genres’ in medicine and dominant discourses in relation to empirical research. We also reflect on the loss of depth and context that may occur with thematic or content analyses of interviews, and discuss the need for transparency about methodologies in empirical bioethics. Drawing on insights from narrative approaches in the social sciences and the clinical-educational discipline of Narrative Medicine, we further clarify these problems and suggest a narrative approach to qualitative interviewing in empirical bioethics that enables researchers to ‘listen (and read) in new ways’. We then show how this approach was applied in the first author’s research project about euthanasia decision-making. In addition, we stress the important ethical task of scrutinizing methodologies and meta-ethical standpoints, as they inevitably impact empirical outcomes and corresponding ethical judgments. Finally, we raise the question whether a ‘diagnostic’, rather than a ‘problem-solving’, mindset could and should be foregrounded in empirical ethics, albeit without losing a commitment to ethics’ normative task, and suggest further avenues for theorizing about listening and epistemic (in)justice in relation to empirical (bio)ethics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bernadette Roest
- University of Humanistic Studies, Kromme Nieuwegracht 29, 3512 HD, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Megan Milota
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, P.O. Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Carlo Leget
- University of Humanistic Studies, Kromme Nieuwegracht 29, 3512 HD, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Mihailov E, Hannikainen IR, Earp BD. Advancing Methods in Empirical Bioethics: Bioxphi Meets Digital Technologies. THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS : AJOB 2021; 21:53-56. [PMID: 34036891 DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2021.1915417] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
|
8
|
Stuhmcke A. Reflections on autonomy in travel for cross border reproductive care. Monash Bioeth Rev 2021; 39:1-27. [PMID: 33453036 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-020-00125-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/26/2020] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
Travel for reproductive health care has become a widespread global phenomenon. Within the field, the decision to travel to seek third parties to assist with reproduction is widely assumed to be autonomous. However there has been scant research exploring the application of the principle of autonomy to the experience of the cross-border traveller. Seeking to contribute to the growing, but still small, body of sociological bioethics research, this paper maps the application of the ethical principle of autonomy to the lived experience of infertile individuals who cross borders for reproductive care. It examines their choices as patient, consumer and traveller. It suggests that their experience evidences a contradictory autonomy, which offers them both choice and no choice in their final decision to travel. The paper argues that this lack of meaningful autonomy is enabled by a medicalised framework of infertility which prioritises technology as the cure to infertility. This both shapes expectations of infertile individuals and limits their options of family creation. Ultimately, the paper suggests that sociological bioethics research shows that the liberatory credentials of technology should be questioned, and identifies that this field demands greater scholarly attention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anita Stuhmcke
- Faculty of Law, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Metselaar S, Geurts J, Meynen G. Responding to Human Brain Surrogates Research: The Value of Empirical Ethics. THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS : AJOB 2021; 21:64-66. [PMID: 33373565 DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2020.1845865] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
|
10
|
Crane AT, Shen FX, Brown JL, Cormack W, Ruiz-Estevez M, Voth JP, Sawai T, Hatta T, Fujita M, Low WC. The American Public Is Ready to Accept Human-Animal Chimera Research. Stem Cell Reports 2020; 15:804-810. [PMID: 33007202 PMCID: PMC7562947 DOI: 10.1016/j.stemcr.2020.08.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2020] [Revised: 08/30/2020] [Accepted: 08/31/2020] [Indexed: 02/02/2023] Open
Abstract
We report findings from a new survey of US public attitudes toward human-animal chimeric embryo (HACE) research, designed to compare with recently reported Japanese survey data. We find that 59% of the US public can personally accept the process of injecting human induced pluripotent stem cells into genetically modified swine embryos and having human tissues produced in a pig's body transplanted into a human. This is greater acceptance than in Japan, and there is even strong acceptance among those with strong religious affiliations and who self-identify as conservatives. We argue that strong public support for HACE research, as well as the emerging literature suggesting that humanization of research animals is very unlikely, should compel the NIH to lift its current moratorium on HACE research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew T. Crane
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA,Corresponding author
| | - Francis X. Shen
- University of Minnesota Law School, Minneapolis, MN, USA,Graduate Program in Neuroscience, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA,Massachusetts General Hospital, Center for Law, Brain, and Behavior, Boston, MA, USA,Corresponding author
| | - Jennifer L. Brown
- University of Minnesota Law School, Minneapolis, MN, USA,Graduate Program in Neuroscience, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Warren Cormack
- University of Minnesota Law School, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | | | - Joseph P. Voth
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Tsutomu Sawai
- Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Biology (WPI-ASHBi), KUIAS Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan,Uehiro Research Division for iPS Cell Ethics, Center for iPS Cell Research and Application, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan
| | - Taichi Hatta
- Uehiro Research Division for iPS Cell Ethics, Center for iPS Cell Research and Application, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan
| | - Misao Fujita
- Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Biology (WPI-ASHBi), KUIAS Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan,Uehiro Research Division for iPS Cell Ethics, Center for iPS Cell Research and Application, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan
| | - Walter C. Low
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA,Graduate Program in Neuroscience, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA,Stem Cell Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Shepherd V, Sheehan M, Hood K, Griffith R, Wood F. Constructing authentic decisions: proxy decision making for research involving adults who lack capacity to consent. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2020; 47:medethics-2019-106042. [PMID: 32878918 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2019-106042] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2019] [Revised: 06/08/2020] [Accepted: 06/26/2020] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Abstract
Research involving adults who lack capacity to consent relies on proxy (or surrogate) decision making. Proxy decisions about participation are ethically complex, with a disparity between normative accounts and empirical evidence. Concerns about the accuracy of proxies' decisions arise, in part, from the lack of an ethical framework which takes account of the complex and morally pluralistic world in which proxy decisions are situated. This qualitative study explored the experiences of family members who have acted as a research proxy in order to develop an understanding of the ethical concepts involved, and the interactions between those concepts. Proxies described a complex process of respecting the wishes and preferences of the person they represented, whist integrating preferences with what they viewed as being in the interests of the person. They aimed to make a decision that was 'best' for the person and protected them from harm; they also aimed to make the 'right' decision, viewed as being authentic to the person's values and life. Decisions were underpinned by the relationship between the person and their proxy, in which both trust and trustworthiness were key. Proxies' decisions, based both on respect for the person and the need to protect their interests, arose out of their dual role as both proxy and carer. The findings raise questions about accounts which rely on existing normative assumptions with a focus on accuracy and discrepancy, and which fail to take account of the requirement for proxies to make authentic decisions that arise out of their caring obligations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Mark Sheehan
- Ethox Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK
| | - Kerenza Hood
- Centre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - Richard Griffith
- College of Human and Health Sciences, Swansea University, Swansea, UK
| | - Fiona Wood
- Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Seidlein AH, Salloch S. Illness and disease: an empirical-ethical viewpoint. BMC Med Ethics 2019; 20:5. [PMID: 30626443 PMCID: PMC6327539 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-018-0341-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2018] [Accepted: 12/25/2018] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The concepts of disease, illness and sickness capture fundamentally different aspects of phenomena related to human ailments and healthcare. The philosophy and theory of medicine are making manifold efforts to capture the essence and normative implications of these concepts. In parallel, socio-empirical studies on patients’ understanding of their situation have yielded a comprehensive body of knowledge regarding subjective perspectives on health-related statuses. Although both scientific fields provide varied valuable insights, they have not been strongly linked to each other. Therefore, the article aims to scrutinise the normative-ethical implications of patient perspectives in building a bridge to the empirical ethics debates. Main text Three potential fields of tension between the illness and the disease perspective are presented. Consequently, findings from empirical research examining patient perspectives on illness are displayed and the practical implications and associated ethical issues which arise are discussed. This leads to the conclusion that an explicit and elaborate empirical-ethical methodology is needed to deal appropriately with the complex interaction between patients’ views and the medico-professional view of disease. Kon’s four-stage model of normative-empirical collaboration is then applied against the background of empirical data on patient perceptions. Starting from this exemplary approach, the article suggests employing empirical-ethical frameworks for further research on the conceptual and normative issues, as they help to integrate perspectives from the philosophy of medicine with socio-empirical research. Conclusion The combination of theoretical and empirical perspectives suggested contributes to a more nuanced discussion of the normative impact of patients’ actual understanding of illness. Further empirical research in this area would profit from explicitly considering potential ethical issues to avoid naturalistic fallacies or crypto-normative conclusions that may compromise healthcare practice. Vice versa, medico-theoretical debates could be enriched by integrating subjective views of those people who are immediately affected.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna-Henrikje Seidlein
- Institute of Ethics and History of Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, Ellernholzstr. 1-2, 17487, Greifswald, Germany
| | - Sabine Salloch
- Institute of Ethics and History of Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, Ellernholzstr. 1-2, 17487, Greifswald, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Wangmo T, Hauri S, Gennet E, Anane-Sarpong E, Provoost V, Elger BS. An update on the "empirical turn" in bioethics: analysis of empirical research in nine bioethics journals. BMC Med Ethics 2018; 19:6. [PMID: 29415709 PMCID: PMC5803920 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-018-0246-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2017] [Accepted: 01/29/2018] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background A review of literature published a decade ago noted a significant increase in empirical papers across nine bioethics journals. This study provides an update on the presence of empirical papers in the same nine journals. It first evaluates whether the empirical trend is continuing as noted in the previous study, and second, how it is changing, that is, what are the characteristics of the empirical works published in these nine bioethics journals. Method A review of the same nine journals (Bioethics; Journal of Medical Ethics; Journal of Clinical Ethics; Nursing Ethics; Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics; Hastings Center Report; Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics; Christian Bioethics; and Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal) was conducted for a 12-year period from 2004 to 2015. Data obtained was analysed descriptively and using a non-parametric Chi-square test. Results Of the total number of original papers (N = 5567) published in the nine bioethics journals, 18.1% (n = 1007) collected and analysed empirical data. Journal of Medical Ethics and Nursing Ethics led the empirical publications, accounting for 89.4% of all empirical papers. The former published significantly more quantitative papers than qualitative, whereas the latter published more qualitative papers. Our analysis reveals no significant difference (χ2 = 2.857; p = 0.091) between the proportion of empirical papers published in 2004–2009 and 2010–2015. However, the increasing empirical trend has continued in these journals with the proportion of empirical papers increasing from 14.9% in 2004 to 17.8% in 2015. Conclusions This study presents the current state of affairs regarding empirical research published nine bioethics journals. In the quarter century of data that is available about the nine bioethics journals studied in two reviews, the proportion of empirical publications continues to increase, signifying a trend towards empirical research in bioethics. The growing volume is mainly attributable to two journals: Journal of Medical Ethics and Nursing Ethics. This descriptive study further maps the still developing field of empirical research in bioethics. Additional studies are needed to completely map the nature and extent of empirical research in bioethics to inform the ongoing debate about the value of empirical research for bioethics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tenzin Wangmo
- Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
| | - Sirin Hauri
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Eloise Gennet
- Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | | | - Veerle Provoost
- Bioethics Institute Ghent, University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Bernice S Elger
- Institute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|