ArticleHEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues2010
Echo calling narcissus: what exceeds the gaze of clinical ethics consultation?
Article in HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Ethics Consultations and the Necessity of NOT Meeting Expectations: I Never Promised You a Rose Garden.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2024Article
- The standardization of clinical ethics consultation and technique's "long encirclement" of humanity: a response to Brummett and Muaygil.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2021Article
- Phenomenology, Saudi Arabia, and an argument for the standardization of clinical ethics consultation.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2021Article
- The Pitfalls of Proceduralism: An Exploration of the Goods Internal to the Practice of Clinical Ethics Consultation.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2018Article
- Conceptualizing boundaries for the professionalization of healthcare ethics practice: a call for empirical research.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2014Article
- The benefits of practice standards and other practice-defining texts: and why healthcare ethicists ought to explore them.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Guiding our response in this essay is our view that current efforts to demarcate the role of the clinical ethicist risk reducing its complex network of authorizations to sites of power and payment. In turn, the role becomes susceptible to various ideologies-individualisms, proceduralisms, secularisms-that further divide the body from the web of significances that matter to that body, where only she, the patient, is located. The security of policy, standards, and employment will pull against and eventually sever the authorization secured by authentic moral inquiry. Instead of asking "What do I need to know?", the question animating the drive to standardize will be "What is the policy or standard?" The claims of the authors in this issue of HEC Forum confirm these suspicions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20490621What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.