Methodological Reflections on the Contribution of Qualitative Research to the Evaluation of Clinical Ethics Support Services

被引:8
作者
Wascher, Sebastian [1 ]
Salloch, Sabine [2 ]
Ritter, Peter [3 ]
Vollmann, Jochen [4 ]
Schildmann, Jan [5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Zurich, Inst Biomed Eth & Hist Med, Zurich, Switzerland
[2] Univ Greifswald, Inst Eth & Hist Med, Greifswald, Germany
[3] Klinikum Westfalen, Dept Internal Med Haematol & Oncol, Med, Dortmund, Germany
[4] Ruhr Univ Bochum, Inst Med Eth & Hist Med, Bochum, Germany
[5] Wilhelm Lohe Univ Appl Sci, Med Eth, Furth, Germany
[6] Ludwig Maximilians Univ Hosp Munich, Dept Internal Med 3, Internal Med, Munich, Germany
关键词
empirical ethics; qualitative research; clinical ethics support services; evaluation; CONSULTATION; QUESTIONS;
D O I
10.1111/bioe.12347
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
This article describes a process of developing, implementing and evaluating a clinical ethics support service intervention with the goal of building up a context-sensitive structure of minimal clinical-ethics in an oncology department without prior clinical ethics structure. Scholars from different disciplines have called for an improvement in the evaluation of clinical ethics support services (CESS) for different reasons over several decades. However, while a lot has been said about the concepts and methodological challenges of evaluating CESS up to the present time, relatively few empirical studies have been carried out. The aim of this article is twofold. On the one hand, it describes a process of development, modifying and evaluating a CESS intervention as part of the ETHICO research project, using the approach of qualitative-formative evaluation. On the other hand, it provides a methodological analysis which specifies the contribution of qualitative empirical methods to the (formative) evaluation of CESS. We conclude with a consideration of the strengths and limitations of qualitative evaluation research with regards to the evaluation and development of context sensitive CESS. We further discuss our own approach in contrast to rather traditional consult or committee models.
引用
收藏
页码:237 / 245
页数:9
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]  
Abma T.A., 2011, The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, V4th, P669
[2]   The practice and politics of responsive evaluation [J].
Abma, TA .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EVALUATION, 2006, 27 (01) :31-43
[3]   Responsive evaluation: Its meaning and special contribution to health promotion [J].
Abma, TA .
EVALUATION AND PROGRAM PLANNING, 2005, 28 (03) :279-289
[4]   Sharing stories - Narrative and dialogue in responsive nursing evaluation [J].
Abma, TA ;
Widdershoven, GAA .
EVALUATION & THE HEALTH PROFESSIONS, 2005, 28 (01) :90-109
[5]  
[Anonymous], DEV EVALUATION TOOL
[6]  
[Anonymous], 1990, Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, DOI DOI 10.1002/NUR.4770140111
[7]  
[Anonymous], J CLIN ETHICS
[8]  
[Anonymous], 2012, Theory of society
[9]  
[Anonymous], QUALITATIVE EVALUATI
[10]  
[Anonymous], EVALUATION THEORY MO