Standards of practice in empirical bioethics research: Towards a consensus

Jonathan Ives; Michael Dunn; Bert Molewijk; Jan Schildmann; Kristine Bærøe; Lucy Frith; Richard Huxtable; Elleke Landeweer; Marcel Mertz; Veerle Provoost; Annette Rid; Sabine Salloch; Mark Sheehan; Daniel Strech; Martine De Vries; Guy Widdershoven

doi:10.1186/s12910-018-0304-3

Standards of practice in empirical bioethics research: Towards a consensus

Jonathan Ives^*
, Michael Dunn
, Bert Molewijk
, Jan Schildmann
, Kristine Bærøe
, Lucy Frith
, Richard Huxtable
, Elleke Landeweer
, Marcel Mertz
, Veerle Provoost
, Annette Rid
, Sabine Salloch
, Mark Sheehan
, Daniel Strech
, Martine De Vries
, Guy Widdershoven

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article (Academic Journal) › peer-review

77 Citations (Scopus)

586 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

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.

Original language	English
Article number	68
Number of pages	20
Journal	BMC Medical Ethics
Volume	19
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-018-0304-3
Publication status	Published - 10 Jul 2018

Keywords

Consensus
Empirical bioethics
Methodology
Methods
Standards

Access to Document

10.1186/s12910-018-0304-3

Full-text PDF (final published version)
This is the final published version of the article (version of record). It first appeared online via BioMed Central at https://bmcmedethics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12910-018-0304-3 . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.
Final published version, 702 KBLicence: CC BY

Handle.net

Persistent link

Cite this

@article{04415cdb3f1846bda9427b9fdb25e9dc,

title = "Standards of practice in empirical bioethics research: Towards a consensus",

abstract = "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.",

keywords = "Consensus, Empirical bioethics, Methodology, Methods, Standards",

author = "Jonathan Ives and Michael Dunn and Bert Molewijk and Jan Schildmann and Kristine B{\ae}r{\o}e and Lucy Frith and Richard Huxtable and Elleke Landeweer and Marcel Mertz and Veerle Provoost and Annette Rid and Sabine Salloch and Mark Sheehan and Daniel Strech and \{De Vries\}, Martine and Guy Widdershoven",

year = "2018",

month = jul,

day = "10",

doi = "10.1186/s12910-018-0304-3",

language = "English",

volume = "19",

journal = "BMC Medical Ethics",

issn = "1472-6939",

publisher = "BioMed Central Ltd",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Standards of practice in empirical bioethics research

T2 - Towards a consensus

AU - Ives, Jonathan

AU - Dunn, Michael

AU - Molewijk, Bert

AU - Schildmann, Jan

AU - Bærøe, Kristine

AU - Frith, Lucy

AU - Huxtable, Richard

AU - Landeweer, Elleke

AU - Mertz, Marcel

AU - Provoost, Veerle

AU - Rid, Annette

AU - Salloch, Sabine

AU - Sheehan, Mark

AU - Strech, Daniel

AU - De Vries, Martine

AU - Widdershoven, Guy

PY - 2018/7/10

Y1 - 2018/7/10

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Consensus

KW - Empirical bioethics

KW - Methodology

KW - Methods

KW - Standards

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85049773400

U2 - 10.1186/s12910-018-0304-3

DO - 10.1186/s12910-018-0304-3

M3 - Article (Academic Journal)

C2 - 29986689

SN - 1472-6939

VL - 19

JO - BMC Medical Ethics

JF - BMC Medical Ethics

M1 - 68

ER -

Standards of practice in empirical bioethics research: Towards a consensus

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Handle.net

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Professor Jonathan C S Ives

Cite this

Standards of practice in empirical bioethics research: Towards a consensus

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Handle.net

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Profiles

Professor Jonathan C S Ives

Cite this