McDougall Rosalind
*School of Population and Global Health, 207 Bouverie St, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia.
J Med Philos. 2014 Feb;39(1):89-97. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jht059. Epub 2013 Dec 14.
There has recently been interest in applying the techniques of systematic review to bioethics literature. In this paper, I identify the three models of systematic review proposed to date in bioethics: systematic reviews of empirical bioethics research, systematic reviews of normative bioethics literature, and systematic reviews of reasons. I argue that all three types yield information useful to scholarship in bioethics, yet they also face significant challenges particularly in relation to terminology and time. Drawing on my recent experience conducting a systematic review, I suggest that complete comprehensiveness may not always be an appropriate goal of a literature review in bioethics, depending on the research question. In some cases, all the relevant ideas may be captured without capturing all the relevant literature. I conclude that systematic reviews in bioethics have an important role to play alongside the traditional broadbrush approach to reviewing literature in bioethics.
最近,人们对将系统评价技术应用于生物伦理学文献产生了兴趣。在本文中,我确定了迄今为止生物伦理学中提出的三种系统评价模型:实证生物伦理学研究的系统评价、规范生物伦理学文献的系统评价以及理由的系统评价。我认为,这三种类型都能产生对生物伦理学学术研究有用的信息,但它们也面临着重大挑战,尤其是在术语和时间方面。借鉴我最近进行系统评价的经验,我认为,根据研究问题的不同,完全全面性可能并不总是生物伦理学文献综述的合适目标。在某些情况下,所有相关观点可能都能被涵盖,而无需涵盖所有相关文献。我得出结论,生物伦理学中的系统评价与传统的宽泛式生物伦理学文献综述方法一样,都能发挥重要作用。