64185Kocaeli University, Turkey.
Nurs Ethics. 2021 Aug;28(5):750-765. doi: 10.1177/0969733020976180. Epub 2021 Jan 12.
Vulnerability is a concept frequently encountered in the bioethical literature, particularly in the context of research ethics. It can be said that the usage of the concept expanded in the 2000s and started to be used in many new contexts in the literature. However, there appears to be no systematic review that examines the definition of the concept of vulnerability.
The rationale for this study constitutes the questions regarding how vulnerability is defined and which components are used to define the concept of vulnerability in the bioethics literature.
The integrative review method was conducted to reach various definitions of the concept of vulnerability in bioethics. Whittemore and Knafl's revised framework for integrative reviews guided the analysis. 'Vulnerability' and 'vulnerable' keywords, intercrossing with the words 'bioethics' and 'medical ethics', were searched in three different databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus). Collected data were analysed thematically and a taxonomy was developed.
A total of 1287 studies obtained through search were reduced to 123 that kept the definition of vulnerability. As a result of the review, a comprehensive taxonomy of vulnerability has been proposed. The proposed taxonomy of vulnerability has two categories, ontological and circumstantial, with three subcategories each, which might provide a multidimensional perspective.
Publication dates, origins and contexts of included publications were discussed. Specifications of the term vulnerability and components of its definition and factors that constitute these components provided from the view were evaluated and also discussed.
The proposed taxonomy provides a useful classification for assessing vulnerability in bioethics. It is hoped that the taxonomy we put forward as a result of the review will increase awareness on the issue and also take into account the factors that create vulnerability in the context of research, healthcare and nursing care policies.
The review was conducted in accord with ethical and scientific standards.
易损性是生物伦理学文献中经常遇到的一个概念，特别是在研究伦理领域。可以说，该概念的使用在 21 世纪扩展，并开始在文献的许多新背景中使用。然而，似乎没有系统的综述来检查易损性概念的定义。
本研究的基本原理是提出以下问题：易损性是如何定义的，以及生物伦理学文献中使用哪些成分来定义易损性概念。
综合审查方法用于在生物伦理学中获得易损性概念的各种定义。Whittemore 和 Knafl 的综合审查修订框架指导了分析。在三个不同的数据库（PubMed、Web of Science 和 Scopus）中，使用了“易损性”和“易损”关键词，并与“生物伦理学”和“医学伦理学”交叉搜索。对收集的数据进行了主题分析，并开发了一个分类法。
通过搜索获得的 1287 项研究减少到了 123 项，这些研究保留了易损性的定义。通过综述，提出了一个全面的易损性分类法。所提出的易损性分类法有两个类别，本体论和情境论，每个类别有三个亚类，这可能提供了一个多维的视角。
讨论了纳入出版物的出版日期、来源和背景。评估并讨论了从该观点来看易损性术语的具体规定及其定义的组成部分以及构成这些组成部分的因素。
所提出的分类法为评估生物伦理学中的易损性提供了一个有用的分类。我们希望，我们在综述中提出的分类法将提高人们对这一问题的认识，并考虑到在研究、医疗保健和护理政策背景下造成易损性的因素。
该综述符合伦理和科学标准进行。
