ReviewBMC medical ethics2018
An update on the "empirical turn" in bioethics: analysis of empirical research in nine bioethics journals.
Review in BMC medical ethics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bioethics at the intersection of politics, society, and healthcare: the significance of media debate analyses.BMC medical ethics · 2025Pooled it
- Empirical Bioethics-Historical, Philosophical, and Methodological Perspectives.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
- Developing prognostic models that predict onset and progression rates in genetic neurodegenerative diseases: perspectives of healthcare professionals in genetic counselling.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2026Article
- Ethical issues in providing comprehensive abortion care to adolescents: a qualitative study of healthcare providers in the Eastern Region of Ghana.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Exploring mutation carriers' preferences regarding onset and progression of disease predictions for adult-onset genetic neurodegenerative diseases: a qualitative interview study.Human genetics · 2025Article
- The Vagueness of Integrating the Empirical and the Normative: Researchers' Views on Doing Empirical Bioethics.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2024Article
- Biases in bioethics: a narrative review.BMC medical ethics · 2023Review
- Empirical studies on how ethical recommendations are translated into practice: a cross-section study on scope and study objectives.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Acceptable objectives of empirical research in bioethics: a qualitative exploration of researchers' views.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- Doing things you never imagined: Professional and ethical issues in the U.S. outpatient physical therapy setting during the COVID-19 pandemic.Musculoskeletal science & practice · 2022Article
- Developing new ways to listen: the value of narrative approaches in empirical (bio)ethics.BMC medical ethics · 2021Article
- Design Bioethics: A Theoretical Framework and Argument for Innovation in Bioethics Research.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2021Article
- Women's viewpoints on egg freezing in Austria: an online Q-methodology study.BMC medical ethics · 2021Article
- In search of good care: the methodology of phenomenological, theory-oriented 'N=N case studies' in empirically grounded ethics of care.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2019Article
- Mapping, framing, shaping: a framework for empirical bioethics research projects.BMC medical ethics · 2019Article
- Illness and disease: an empirical-ethical viewpoint.BMC medical ethics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA review of literature published a decade ago noted a significant increase in empirical papers across nine bioethics journals. This study provides an update on the presence of empirical papers in the same nine journals. It first evaluates whether the empirical trend is continuing as noted in the previous study, and second, how it is changing, that is, what are the characteristics of the empirical works published in these nine bioethics journals.
methodA review of the same nine journals (Bioethics; Journal of Medical Ethics; Journal of Clinical Ethics; Nursing Ethics; Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics; Hastings Center Report; Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics; Christian Bioethics; and Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal) was conducted for a 12-year period from 2004 to 2015. Data obtained was analysed descriptively and using a non-parametric Chi-square test.
resultsOf the total number of original papers (N = 5567) published in the nine bioethics journals, 18.1% (n = 1007) collected and analysed empirical data. Journal of Medical Ethics and Nursing Ethics led the empirical publications, accounting for 89.4% of all empirical papers. The former published significantly more quantitative papers than qualitative, whereas the latter published more qualitative papers. Our analysis reveals no significant difference (χ2 = 2.857; p = 0.091) between the proportion of empirical papers published in 2004-2009 and 2010-2015. However, the increasing empirical trend has continued in these journals with the proportion of empirical papers increasing from 14.9% in 2004 to 17.8% in 2015.
conclusionsThis study presents the current state of affairs regarding empirical research published nine bioethics journals. In the quarter century of data that is available about the nine bioethics journals studied in two reviews, the proportion of empirical publications continues to increase, signifying a trend towards empirical research in bioethics. The growing volume is mainly attributable to two journals: Journal of Medical Ethics and Nursing Ethics. This descriptive study further maps the still developing field of empirical research in bioethics. Additional studies are needed to completely map the nature and extent of empirical research in bioethics to inform the ongoing debate about the value of empirical research for bioethics.
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.