ArticleBMC medical ethics2014
Outcomes of moral case deliberation--the development of an evaluation instrument for clinical ethics support (the Euro-MCD).
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 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
39 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing ethical competence and ethical climate: development and psychometric testing of the Clinical Ethics Support Measurement Instrument (CES-MI).BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Case-Based Clinical Ethics Support - A Description and Normative Discussion of Methodological Issues from the Swedish Perspective.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2026Article
- The Japanese version of the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcomes Instrument (Euro-MCD 2.0): Validation and score distribution among nurses, doctors, and other healthcare providers-A cross-sectional study.Global health & medicine · 2026Article
- Should Clinical Ethicists Be Informed About Case Resolutions?HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2026Article
- Fostering moral reflectivity in community pharmacists through moral case deliberation using the dilemma method.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Article
- What is a High-Quality Moral Case Deliberation?-Facilitators' Perspectives in the Euro-MCD Project.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2024Article
- CURA-An Ethics Support Instrument for Nurses in Palliative Care. Feasibility and First Perceived Outcomes.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2023Article
- Two years of ethics reflection groups about coercion in psychiatry. Measuring variation within employees' normative attitudes, user involvement and the handling of disagreement.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- What outcomes of moral case deliberations are perceived important for healthcare professionals to handle moral challenges? A national cross-sectional study in paediatric oncology.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- Clinical ethics consultations: a scoping review of reported outcomes.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- Moral and exhausting distress working in the frontline of COVID-19: a Swedish survey during the first wave in four healthcare settings.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Framework for evaluation research on clinical ethical case interventions: the role of ethics consultants.Journal of medical ethics · 2022Article
- Field-Testing the Euro-MCD Instrument: Important Outcomes According to Participants Before and After Moral Case Deliberation.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2022Article
- Stakeholder dialogue on dilemmas at work as a workplace health promotion intervention including employees with a low SEP: a Responsive Evaluation.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Conceptualizing the impact of moral case deliberation: a multiple-case study in a health care institution for people with intellectual disabilities.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- "There Was a Sense That Our Load Had Been Lightened": Evaluating Outcomes of Virtual Ethics Rounds for Veterinary Team Members.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
- Perceptions of important outcomes of moral case deliberations: a qualitative study among healthcare professionals in childhood cancer care.BMC medical ethics · 2021Article
- Ethical conflicts during the process of deciding about ICU admission: an empirically driven ethical analysis.Journal of medical ethics · 2021Article
- Dealing with Moral Challenges in Treatment of Transgender Children and Adolescents: Evaluating the Role of Moral Case Deliberation.Archives of sexual behavior · 2020Article
- Moral competence, moral teamwork and moral action - the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcomes (Euro-MCD) Instrument 2.0 and its revision process.BMC medical ethics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical ethics support, in particular Moral Case Deliberation, aims to support health care providers to manage ethically difficult situations. However, there is a lack of evaluation instruments regarding outcomes of clinical ethics support in general and regarding Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) in particular. There also is a lack of clarity and consensuses regarding which MCD outcomes are beneficial. In addition, MCD outcomes might be context-sensitive. Against this background, there is a need for a standardised but flexible outcome evaluation instrument. The aim of this study was to develop a multi-contextual evaluation instrument measuring health care providers' experiences and perceived importance of outcomes of Moral Case Deliberation.
methodsA multi-item instrument for assessing outcomes of Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) was constructed through an iterative process, founded on a literature review and modified through a multistep review by ethicists and health care providers. The instrument measures perceived importance of outcomes before and after MCD, as well as experienced outcomes during MCD and in daily work. A purposeful sample of 86 European participants contributed to a Delphi panel and content validity testing. The Delphi panel (n = 13), consisting of ethicists and ethics researchers, participated in three Delphi-rounds. Health care providers (n = 73) participated in the content validity testing through 'think-aloud' interviews and a method using Content Validity Index.
resultsThe development process resulted in the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcomes Instrument (Euro-MCD), which consists of two sections, one to be completed before a participant's first MCD and the other after completing multiple MCDs. The instrument contains a few open-ended questions and 26 specific items with a corresponding rating/response scale representing various MCD outcomes. The items were categorised into the following six domains: Enhanced emotional support, Enhanced collaboration, Improved moral reflexivity, Improved moral attitude, Improvement on organizational level and Concrete results.
conclusionsA tentative instrument has been developed that seems to cover main outcomes of Moral Case Deliberation. The next step will be to test the Euro-MCD in a field study.
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.