Dunn Michael, Ives Jonathan, Molewijk Bert, Schildmann Jan
The Ethox Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, Old Road Campus, University of Oxford, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.
Wellcome Centre for Ethics and the Humanities, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
BMC Med Ethics. 2018 Jul 13;19(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s12910-018-0302-5.
This paper responds to the commentaries from Stacy Carter and Alan Cribb. We pick up on two main themes in our response. First, we reflect on how the process of setting standards for empirical bioethics research entails drawing boundaries around what research counts as empirical bioethics research, and we discuss whether the standards agreed in the consensus process draw these boundaries correctly. Second, we expand on the discussion in the original paper of the role and significance of the concept of 'integrating' empirical methods and ethical argument as a standard for research practice within empirical bioethics.
本文回应了斯泰西·卡特(Stacy Carter)和艾伦·克里布(Alan Cribb)的评论。我们在回应中关注两个主要主题。首先,我们思考为实证生物伦理学研究设定标准的过程如何涉及划定哪些研究属于实证生物伦理学研究的界限,并讨论在共识过程中商定的标准是否正确地划定了这些界限。其次,我们扩展了原论文中关于将实证方法与伦理论证“整合”这一概念作为实证生物伦理学研究实践标准的作用和意义的讨论。