ArticleHEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues2012
Mapping our practice? Some conceptual "bumps" for us to consider.
Article in HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Theory and practice of integrative clinical ethics support: a joint experience within gender affirmative care.BMC medical ethics · 2020Article
- Integrative Clinical Ethics Support in Gender Affirmative Care: Lessons Learned.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2019Article
- Towards Substantive Standardization: Ethical Rules as Ethical Presumptions.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2016Article
- 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
- Getting engaged: exploring professionalization in Canada. Introduction to this issue.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2012Article
- 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are several important conceptual issues and questions about the practice of healthcare ethics that can, and should, inform the development of any practice standards. This paper provides a relatively short overview of seven of these issues, with the invitation for further critical reflection and examination of their relevance to and implications for practice standards. The seven issues described include: diversity (from the perspective of training and experience); moral expertise and authority/influence; being an insider or outsider; flexibility and adaptability (for local contexts of practice); the relative weighting of procedural and normative aspects of ethics practice; making mistakes or errors; and conflicts of interest in practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22886153What 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.