Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24210881›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2013

Experiencing everyday ethics in context: frontline data collectors perspectives and practices of bioethics.

Patricia Kingori

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 107 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Bioethics and the value of disagreement.Journal of medical ethics · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. "Global bioethics = Problemi di bioetica · 2022
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Patricia KingoriThe Ethox Centre, University of Oxford, Rosemary Rue Building, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford OX3 7LF, UK. Electronic address: patricia.kingori@ethox.ox.ac.uk.
Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust 095889Wellcome Trust WT080546MF
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Data collectors play a vital role in producing scientific knowledge. They are also an important component in understanding the practice of bioethics. Yet, very little attention has been given to their everyday experiences or the context in which they are expected to undertake these tasks. This paper argues that while there has been extensive philosophical attention given to 'the what' and 'the why' in bioethics - what action is taken place and why - these should be considered along 'the who' - who are the individuals tasked with bioethics and what can their insights bring to macro-level and abstract discussions of bioethics. This paper will draw on the philosophical theories of Paul Ricoeur which compliments a sociological examination of data collectors experiences and use of their agency coupled with a concern for contextual and institutional factors in which they worked. In emphasising everyday experiences and contexts, I will argue that data collectors' practice of bioethics was shaped by their position at the frontline of face-to-face interactions with medical research participants and community members, alongside their own personal ethical values and motivations. Institutional interpretations of bioethics also imposed certain parameters on their bioethical practice but these were generally peripheral to their sense of obligation and the expectations conferred in witnessing the needs and suffering of those they encountered during their quotidian research duties. This paper will demonstrate that although the principle of autonomy has dominated discussions of bioethics and gaining informed consent seen as a central facet of ethical research by many research institutions, for data collectors this principle was seldom the most important marker of their ethical practice. Instead, data collectors were concerned with remedying the dilemmas they encountered through enacting their own interpretations of justice and beneficence and imposing their own agency on the circumstances they experienced. Their practice of bioethics demonstrates their contribution to the conduct of research and the shortcomings of an over-emphasis on autonomy.

Indexed as

AttitudeBioethical IssuesBeneficenceBiomedical ResearchData CollectionHumansPersonal AutonomySocial JusticeAutonomyBioethicsData collectorsJusticeMedical research

Identifiers

PMID24210881
PMCPMC3898703
OpenAlexW1995641916

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.