Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Systematic reviews of empirical bioethics
View through CrossRef
Background:
Publications and discussions of survey research in empirical bioethics have steadily increased over the past two decades. However, findings often differ among studies with similar research questions. As a consequence, ethical reasoning that considers only parts of the existing literature and does not apply systematic reviews tends to be biased. To date, we lack a systematic review (SR) methodology that takes into account the specific conceptual and practical challenges of empirical bioethics.
Methods:
The steps of systematically reviewing empirical findings in bioethics are presented and critically discussed. In particular, (a) the limitations of traditional SR methodologies in the field of empirical bioethics are critically discussed, and (b) conceptual and practical recommendations for SRs in empirical bioethics that are (c) based on the authors’ review experiences in healthcare ethics are presented.
Results:
A 7-step approach for SRs of empirical bioethics is proposed: (1) careful definition of review question; (2) selection of relevant databases; (3) application of ancillary search strategies; (4) development of search algorithms; (5) relevance assessment of the retrieved references; (6) quality assessment of included studies; and (7) data analysis and presentation. Conceptual and practical challenges arise because of various peculiarities in reviewing empirical bioethics literature and can lead to biased results if they are not taken into account.
Conclusions:
If suitably adapted to the peculiarities of the field, SRs of empirical bioethics provide transparent information for ethical reasoning and decision-making that is less biased than single studies.
Title: Systematic reviews of empirical bioethics
Description:
Background:
Publications and discussions of survey research in empirical bioethics have steadily increased over the past two decades.
However, findings often differ among studies with similar research questions.
As a consequence, ethical reasoning that considers only parts of the existing literature and does not apply systematic reviews tends to be biased.
To date, we lack a systematic review (SR) methodology that takes into account the specific conceptual and practical challenges of empirical bioethics.
Methods:
The steps of systematically reviewing empirical findings in bioethics are presented and critically discussed.
In particular, (a) the limitations of traditional SR methodologies in the field of empirical bioethics are critically discussed, and (b) conceptual and practical recommendations for SRs in empirical bioethics that are (c) based on the authors’ review experiences in healthcare ethics are presented.
Results:
A 7-step approach for SRs of empirical bioethics is proposed: (1) careful definition of review question; (2) selection of relevant databases; (3) application of ancillary search strategies; (4) development of search algorithms; (5) relevance assessment of the retrieved references; (6) quality assessment of included studies; and (7) data analysis and presentation.
Conceptual and practical challenges arise because of various peculiarities in reviewing empirical bioethics literature and can lead to biased results if they are not taken into account.
Conclusions:
If suitably adapted to the peculiarities of the field, SRs of empirical bioethics provide transparent information for ethical reasoning and decision-making that is less biased than single studies.
Related Results
Bioethics-CSR Divide
Bioethics-CSR Divide
Photo by Sean Pollock on Unsplash
ABSTRACT
Bioethics and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) were born out of similar concerns, such as the reaction to scandal and the restraint ...
Escaping the Shadow
Escaping the Shadow
Photo by Karl Raymund Catabas on Unsplash
The interests of patients at most levels of policymaking are represented by a disconnected patchwork of groups … “After Buddha was dead, ...
A Critique of Principlism
A Critique of Principlism
Photo by Towfiqu barbhuiya on Unsplash
INTRODUCTION
Bioethics does not have an explicitly stated and agreed upon means of resolving conflicts between normative theories. As such, b...
Autonomy on Trial
Autonomy on Trial
Photo by CHUTTERSNAP on Unsplash
Abstract
This paper critically examines how US bioethics and health law conceptualize patient autonomy, contrasting the rights-based, individualist...
Tlacoqualli in Monequi "The Center Good"
Tlacoqualli in Monequi "The Center Good"
Photo by Andrew James on Unsplash
INTRODUCTION
Since its inception, bioethics has focused on Western conceptions of ethics and science. This has provided a strong foundation to bui...
Do evidence summaries increase health policy‐makers' use of evidence from systematic reviews? A systematic review
Do evidence summaries increase health policy‐makers' use of evidence from systematic reviews? A systematic review
This review summarizes the evidence from six randomized controlled trials that judged the effectiveness of systematic review summaries on policymakers' decision making, or the most...
Searching and reporting in Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews: A systematic assessment of current methods
Searching and reporting in Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews: A systematic assessment of current methods
AbstractThe search methods used in systematic reviews provide the foundation for establishing the body of literature from which conclusions are drawn and recommendations made. Sear...
Evaluating the Science to Inform the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans Midcourse Report
Evaluating the Science to Inform the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans Midcourse Report
Abstract
The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans (Guidelines) advises older adults to be as active as possible. Yet, despite the well documented benefits of physical a...

