Article Text

PDF
Paper
Evaluation of clinical ethics support services and its normativity
  1. Jan Schildmann1,
  2. Bert Molewijk2,3,
  3. Lazare Benaroyo4,
  4. Reidun Forde5,
  5. Gerald Neitzke6
  1. 1Department of Medical Ethics, Institute of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, RuhrUniversity Bochum, Bochum, Germany
  2. 2Department of Medical Humanities, EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  3. 3Center for Medical Ethics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
  4. 4Ethics Unit, Faculty of Biology and Medicine and Interdisciplinary Ethics Platform, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
  5. 5Center for Medical Ethics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
  6. 6Institut für Geschichte, Ethik und Philosophie der Medizin, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Germany
  1. Correspondence to Dr Jan Schildmann, Department of Medical Ethics, Institute of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, RuhrUniversity Bochum, Malakowturm Markstr. 258a, Bochum 44799, Germany; jan.schildmann{at}rub.de

Abstract

Evaluation of clinical ethics support services (CESS) has attracted considerable interest in recent decades. However, few evaluation studies are explicit about normative presuppositions which underlie the goals and the research design of CESS evaluation. In this paper, we provide an account of normative premises of different approaches to CESS evaluation and argue that normativity should be a focus of considerations when designing and conducting evaluation research of CESS. In a first step, we present three different approaches to CESS evaluation from published literature. Next to a brief sketch of the well-established approaches of ‘descriptive evaluation’ and ‘evaluation of outcomes’, we will give a more detailed description of a third approach to evaluation—‘reconstructing quality norms of CESS’—which is explicit about the normative presuppositions of its research (design). In the subsequent section, we will analyse the normative premises of each of the three approaches to CESS evaluation. We will conclude with a brief argument for more sensitivity towards the normativity of CESS and its evaluation research.

  • Clinical Ethics
  • Ethics Committees/Consultation

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Linked Articles

  • The concise argument
    Kenneth Boyd