实证生物伦理学研究的实践标准：迈向共识
Standards of practice in empirical bioethics research: towards a consensus.
作者信息
Ives Jonathan, Dunn Michael, Molewijk Bert, Schildmann Jan, Bærøe Kristine, Frith Lucy, Huxtable Richard, Landeweer Elleke, Mertz Marcel, Provoost Veerle, Rid Annette, Salloch Sabine, Sheehan Mark, Strech Daniel, de Vries Martine, Widdershoven Guy
机构信息
University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
出版信息
BMC Med Ethics. 2018 Jul 10;19(1):68. doi: 10.1186/s12910-018-0304-3.
BACKGROUND
This paper reports the process and outcome of a consensus finding project, which began with a meeting at the Brocher Foundation in May 2015. The project sought to generate and reach consensus on standards of practice for Empirical Bioethics research. The project involved 16 academics from 5 different European Countries, with a range of disciplinary backgrounds.
METHODS
The consensus process used a modified Delphi approach.
RESULTS
Consensus was reached on 15 standards of practice, organised into 6 domains of research practice (Aims, Questions, Integration, Conduct of Empirical Work, Conduct of Normative Work; Training & Expertise).
CONCLUSIONS
Through articulating these standards we outline a position that encourages responses, and through those responses we will be able to identify points of agreement and contestation that will drive the conversation forward. In that vein, we would encourage researchers, funders and journals to engage with what we have proposed, and respond to us, so that our community of practice of empirical bioethics research can develop and evolve further.
背景
本文报告了一项共识达成项目的过程与成果，该项目始于2015年5月在布罗谢尔基金会召开的一次会议。该项目旨在就实证生物伦理学研究的实践标准达成共识并形成相关标准。该项目涉及来自5个不同欧洲国家的16位学者，他们具有不同的学科背景。
方法
共识达成过程采用了改良的德尔菲法。
结果
就15项实践标准达成了共识，这些标准被归为6个研究实践领域（目标、问题、整合、实证工作的开展、规范工作的开展；培训与专业技能）。
结论
通过阐明这些标准，我们勾勒出了一个鼓励各方回应的立场，通过这些回应，我们将能够识别出推动对话前进的共识点和争议点。本着这一精神，我们鼓励研究人员、资助者和期刊参与我们提出的内容并给予回应，以便我们的实证生物伦理学研究实践社区能够进一步发展和演变。
Zotero 插件