Hofmann Bjørn, Magelssen Morten
The Institute for the Health Sciences, at the Norwegian University for Science and Technology (NTNU), Gjøvik, Norway.
Centre for Medical Ethics, University of Oslo, PO Box 1130, Blindern, N-0318, Oslo, Norway.
BMC Med Ethics. 2018 Jun 15;19(1):60. doi: 10.1186/s12910-018-0299-9.
What is good bioethics? Addressing this question is key for reinforcing and developing the field. In particular, a discussion of potential quality criteria can heighten awareness and contribute to the quality of bioethics publications. Accordingly, the objective of this article is threefold: first, we want to identify a set of criteria for quality in bioethics. Second, we want to illustrate the added value of a novel method: in-depth analysis of a single article with the aim of deriving quality criteria. The third and ultimate goal is to stimulate a broad and vivid debate on goodness in bioethics.
An initial literature search reveals a range of diverse quality criteria. In order to expand on the realm of such quality criteria, we perform an in-depth analysis of an article that is acclaimed for being exemplary.
The analysis results in eleven specific quality criteria for good bioethics in three categories: argumentative, empirical, and dialectic. Although we do not claim that the identified criteria are universal or absolute, we argue that they are fruitful for fueling a continuous constitutive debate on what is "good bioethics."
Identifying, debating, refining, and applying such criteria is an important part of defining and improving bioethics.
什么是良好的生物伦理学？回答这个问题是加强和发展该领域的关键。特别是，对潜在质量标准的讨论可以提高认识并有助于提高生物伦理学出版物的质量。因此，本文的目标有三个：第一，我们希望确定一套生物伦理学的质量标准。第二，我们希望说明一种新方法的附加价值：对一篇文章进行深入分析以得出质量标准。第三个也是最终目标是激发关于生物伦理学中“善”的广泛而活跃的辩论。
初步的文献检索揭示了一系列不同的质量标准。为了扩展此类质量标准的范围，我们对一篇被誉为典范的文章进行了深入分析。
分析得出了良好生物伦理学的十一项具体质量标准，分为论证性、实证性和辩证性三类。虽然我们并不声称所确定的标准是普遍的或绝对的，但我们认为它们有助于推动关于什么是“良好生物伦理学”的持续构成性辩论。
识别、辩论、完善和应用这些标准是定义和改进生物伦理学的重要组成部分。
