Article info
PDFClinical ethics
Review of measurement instruments in clinical and research ethics, 1999–2003
- Correspondence to: B K Redman Wayne State University, 5557 Cass Avenue, Suite 100, Detroit, MI 48202, USA; ae9080{at}wayne.edu
Citation
Review of measurement instruments in clinical and research ethics, 1999–2003
Publication history
- Received April 20, 2005
- Accepted June 29, 2005
- Revised June 28, 2005
- First published February 28, 2006.
Online issue publication
February 28, 2006
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.
Copyright information
Copyright 2006 by the Journal of Medical Ethics
Other content recommended for you
- Towards collective moral resilience: the potential of communities of practice during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond
- Highlights in bioethics through 40 years: a quantitative analysis of top-cited journal articles
- Clinical ethicists’ perspectives on organisational ethics in healthcare organisations
- Design and validity of an instrument to assess healthcare professionals’ perceptions, behaviour, self-efficacy and attitudes towards evidence-based health practice: I-SABE
- Healthcare professionals’ moral distress in adult palliative care: a systematic review
- Tools to assess the measurement properties of quality of life instruments: a meta-review
- Evaluating the development, woman-centricity and psychometric properties of maternity patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs): A systematic review protocol
- Protocol for psychometric evaluation of the Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis - Bulbar Dysfunction Index (ALS-BDI): a prospective longitudinal study
- Moral and exhausting distress working in the frontline of COVID-19: a Swedish survey during the first wave in four healthcare settings
- The transformation of (bio)ethics expertise in a world of ethical pluralism