Suppr超能文献

英国的临床伦理委员会:迈向评估

CLINICAL ETHICS COMMITTEES IN THE UNITED KINGDOM: TOWARDS EVALUATION.

作者信息

Williamson Laura, McLean Sheila, Connell Judith

机构信息

University of Glasgow.

出版信息

Med Law Int. 2007 Feb 9;8(3):221-238. doi: 10.1177/096853320700800302.

Abstract

In the United Kingdom there is a growing conviction that CECs have an important role to play in helping health care professionals address ethical dilemmas. For example, the Royal College of Physicians, the Nuffield Trust and the unofficial Clinical Ethics Network, which has received financial support from the Department of Health, commend the use of CECs in the UK. The growth of such committees has been influenced by the legal and policy support they have received in the United States. However, there is increasing concern about both the benefits and the quality of work produced by CECs. In addition, despite the rapid increase in the number of CECs in the UK, outside of the United States they remain under-researched and no formal mechanism exists to assess their performance. As a result we know little about the structure, function, impact and effectiveness of CECs. We are currently conducting a research project funded by the Wellcome Trust that seeks to interrogate the competing claims regarding the benefits and disbenefits of CECs. This initial account of our research provides a detailed analysis of theoretical issues that surround the development and use of CECs and points towards the questions that lie at the heart of the social science strand of our project.

摘要

在英国,人们越来越坚信临床伦理委员会在帮助医疗保健专业人员解决伦理困境方面可发挥重要作用。例如,皇家内科医学院、纳菲尔德信托基金会以及接受了卫生部资金支持的非官方临床伦理网络都对在英国使用临床伦理委员会表示赞许。此类委员会的发展受到了它们在美国所获得的法律和政策支持的影响。然而,人们对临床伦理委员会所产生的益处和工作质量的担忧日益增加。此外,尽管英国临床伦理委员会的数量迅速增长,但在美国以外地区,对它们的研究仍然不足,而且不存在评估其绩效的正式机制。因此,我们对临床伦理委员会的结构、功能、影响和有效性知之甚少。我们目前正在开展一个由惠康信托基金会资助的研究项目,该项目旨在对有关临床伦理委员会利弊的相互矛盾的说法进行探究。我们这项研究的初步报告对围绕临床伦理委员会的发展和使用的理论问题进行了详细分析,并指出了我们项目社会科学部分核心问题的方向。

相似文献

4
Evaluating the effectiveness of clinical ethics committees: a systematic review.评估临床伦理委员会的有效性:系统评价。
Med Health Care Philos. 2021 Mar;24(1):135-151. doi: 10.1007/s11019-020-09986-9. Epub 2020 Nov 21.

引用本文的文献

6
Evaluating the effectiveness of clinical ethics committees: a systematic review.评估临床伦理委员会的有效性:系统评价。
Med Health Care Philos. 2021 Mar;24(1):135-151. doi: 10.1007/s11019-020-09986-9. Epub 2020 Nov 21.
8
Assessing physicians' roles on health care ethics committees.
HEC Forum. 2010 Dec;22(4):275-86. doi: 10.1007/s10730-010-9142-5.
9
Core competencies for clinical ethics committees.临床伦理委员会的核心能力。
Clin Med (Lond). 2010 Feb;10(1):30-3. doi: 10.7861/clinmedicine.10-1-30.

本文引用的文献

2
Why doctors use or do not use ethics consultation.医生使用或不使用伦理咨询的原因。
J Med Ethics. 2006 Sep;32(9):499-502. doi: 10.1136/jme.2005.014464.
6
Development of clinical ethics committees.临床伦理委员会的发展。
BMJ. 2004 Apr 17;328(7445):950-2. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7445.950.
10
The case of Ms B and the "right to die".B女士的案例与“死亡权利”
J Med Ethics. 2002 Aug;28(4):243. doi: 10.1136/jme.28.4.243.

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