ArticleHEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues2012
Grassroots origins, national engagement: exploring the professionalization of practicing healthcare ethicists in Canada.
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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lessons learned from implementing a responsive quality assessment of clinical ethics support.BMC medical ethics · 2019Article
- Philosophy of Healthcare Ethics Practice Statements: Quality Attestation and Beyond.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
- Mapping our practice? Some conceptual "bumps" for us to consider.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2012Article
- 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Canadian ethicists have a long legacy of leadership in advocating for standards and quality in healthcare ethics. Continuing this tradition, a grassroots organization of practicing healthcare ethicists (PHEs) concerned about the lack of standardization in the field recently formed to explore potential options related to professionalization. This group calls itself "practicing healthcare ethicists exploring professionalization" (PHEEP). This paper provides a description of the process by which PHEEP has begun to engage the Canadian PHE community in the development of practice standards and related projects. By making our process and its ethical and cultural underpinnings transparent, we hope to prompt PHEs around the world to reflect on the importance of context, process and principles (not just outcomes) in the exploration of and possible movement towards professionalization. By sharing some of our key successes and challenges, we also hope to inspire our colleagues to recognize the value in developing practice standards and to contribute to this endeavor.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.