• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

获取并维持同意:一项针对濒死患者的研究中引发的伦理问题。

Gaining and maintaining consent: ethical concerns raised in a study of dying patients.

作者信息

Lawton J

机构信息

Newnham College, University of Cambridge.

出版信息

Qual Health Res. 2001 Sep;11(5):693-705. doi: 10.1177/104973201129119389.

DOI:10.1177/104973201129119389
PMID:11554196
Abstract

This article provides a frank discussion of the practical and ethical issues that emerged during the process of setting up and conducting a participant observation study within an inpatient hospice. A general overview of the participant observation approach is used to prefigure a discussion of its strengths and weaknesses when employed as a research and evaluation tool among palliative care populations. Although participant observation provided a flexible and viable means of collecting data in the hospice, it also created a number of dilemmas that in many cases could not be satisfactorily resolved. Difficulties arose, in particular, with obtaining informed consent from patients and assuming that consent remained valid after patients had deteriorated physically and mentally. Further complications stemmed from the role conflict and ambiguity inherent within an approach that requires a researcher to work simultaneously as a participant and as an observer.

摘要

本文坦率地讨论了在住院临终关怀机构建立和开展参与观察研究过程中出现的实际问题和伦理问题。对参与观察法进行了总体概述,以此为基础讨论其作为姑息治疗人群研究和评估工具时的优缺点。尽管参与观察为在临终关怀机构收集数据提供了灵活且可行的方法,但它也带来了一些在许多情况下无法圆满解决的困境。特别是在获取患者知情同意以及假定患者身心状况恶化后同意仍然有效的方面出现了困难。进一步的复杂情况源于一种要求研究者同时作为参与者和观察者的方法所固有的角色冲突和模糊性。

相似文献

1
Gaining and maintaining consent: ethical concerns raised in a study of dying patients.获取并维持同意:一项针对濒死患者的研究中引发的伦理问题。
Qual Health Res. 2001 Sep;11(5):693-705. doi: 10.1177/104973201129119389.
2
The ethical basis of psychiatric research: conceptual issues and empirical findings.精神病学研究的伦理基础:概念问题与实证发现。
Compr Psychiatry. 1998 May-Jun;39(3):99-110. doi: 10.1016/s0010-440x(98)90068-2.
3
Ethical considerations in qualitative research with hospice patients.
Qual Health Res. 1992 May;2(2):238-49. doi: 10.1177/104973239200200207.
4
Practical ethical issues related to the care of elderly people with dementia.与痴呆症老年人护理相关的实际伦理问题。
Nurs Ethics. 1994 Sep;1(3):151-62. doi: 10.1177/096973309400100304.
5
Participant observation, informed consent and ethical approval.
Nurse Res. 2002;9(4):58-69. doi: 10.7748/nr2002.07.9.4.58.c6198.
6
Ethical issues in psychosocial interventions research involving controls.涉及对照组的心理社会干预研究中的伦理问题。
Ethics Behav. 2002;12(1):87-101. doi: 10.1207/S15327019EB1201_6.
7
Guidelines on research in palliative care.
Bull Med Ethics. 1995 Aug;No. 110:19-20.
8
The research imperative and human rights.研究的必要性与人权。
Phila Med. 1974 Feb;70(2):73+.
9
Ethical considerations of ensuring an informed and autonomous consent in research involving critically ill patients.在涉及重症患者的研究中确保知情且自主同意的伦理考量。
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1996 Sep;154(3 Pt 1):582-6. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.154.3.8810590.
10
Informed consent in catastrophic disease research and treatment.
Univ PA Law Rev. 1974 Dec;123(2):340-438.

引用本文的文献

1
Towards a culture of care for ethical review: connections and frictions in institutional and individual practices of social research ethics.迈向关爱伦理审查的文化:社会研究伦理在机构与个体实践中的联系与摩擦
Soc Cult Geogr. 2021 Jul 12;24(1):104-120. doi: 10.1080/14649365.2021.1939122. eCollection 2023.
2
Qualitative Data Sharing: Participant Understanding, Motivation, and Consent.定性数据共享:参与者的理解、动机和同意。
Qual Health Res. 2022 Jan;32(1):182-191. doi: 10.1177/10497323211054058. Epub 2021 Dec 1.
3
Unwelcome memento mori or best clinical practice? Community end of life anticipatory medication prescribing practice: A mixed methods observational study.
不受欢迎的死亡提醒还是最佳临床实践?社区临终预期用药处方实践:一项混合方法观察性研究。
Palliat Med. 2022 Jan;36(1):95-104. doi: 10.1177/02692163211043382. Epub 2021 Sep 8.
4
Considerations and recommendations for conducting qualitative research interviews with palliative and end-of-life care patients in the home setting: a consensus paper.关于在家中对姑息治疗和临终关怀患者进行定性研究访谈的考量与建议:一份共识文件。
BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2019 Mar;9(1):e14. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2015-000892. Epub 2015 Dec 8.
5
Conducting research interviews with bereaved family carers: when do we ask?对失去亲人的家庭照顾者进行研究访谈:我们何时提问?
J Palliat Med. 2015 Mar;18(3):241-5. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2014.0320. Epub 2014 Dec 17.
6
Ethics of palliative surgery in esophageal cancer.食管癌姑息性手术的伦理学
Iran J Cancer Prev. 2013 Winter;6(1):8-11.
7
Lessons from the field: challenges in accruing hospice heart failure patients to intervention research.实地经验教训:将终末期心力衰竭患者纳入干预研究的挑战。
J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2014 Jan-Feb;29(1):91-7. doi: 10.1097/JCN.0b013e3182784cc0.
8
Procedure versus process: ethical paradigms and the conduct of qualitative research.程序与过程:伦理范式与定性研究的实施。
BMC Med Ethics. 2012 Sep 27;13:25. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-13-25.
9
Protecting respondent confidentiality in qualitative research.保护定性研究中被调查者的保密性。
Qual Health Res. 2009 Nov;19(11):1632-41. doi: 10.1177/1049732309350879.
10
End of life care in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: in search of a good death.慢性阻塞性肺疾病的临终关怀:探寻善终之道。
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2008;3(1):11-29. doi: 10.2147/copd.s698.