Evaluating Clinical Ethics Support: A Participatory Approach

被引:21
作者
Metselaar, Suzanne [1 ]
Widdershoven, Guy [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Porz, Rouven [3 ,4 ]
Molewijk, Bert [5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Vrije Univ Amsterdam Med Ctr, Dept Med Humanities, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Vrije Univ Amsterdam Med Ctr, Philosophy & Eth Med, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] EACME, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[4] Inselspital Bern, Bern Univ Hosp, Clin Eth Support Serv, Bern, Switzerland
[5] Vrije Univ Amsterdam Med Ctr, Dept Med Humanities, Clin Eth Support, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[6] Univ Oslo UIO, Ctr Med Eth SME, Clin Eth Support, Oslo, Norway
关键词
evaluation; clinical ethics support; dialogue; moral case deliberation; participation; responsive evaluation; RESPONSIVE EVALUATION; QUALITY; CARE; HEALTH; CONSULTATION; DELIBERATION;
D O I
10.1111/bioe.12348
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
The current process towards formalization within evaluation research, in particular the use of pre-set standards and the focus on predefined outcomes, implies a shift of ownership from the people who are actually involved in real clinical ethics support services (CESS) in a specific context to external stakeholders who increasingly gain a say in what good CESS' should look like. The question is whether this does justice to the insights and needs of those who are directly involved in actual CESS practices, be it as receivers or providers. We maintain that those actually involved in concrete CESS practices should also be involved in its evaluation, not only as respondents, but also in setting the agenda of the evaluation process and in articulating the criteria by which CESS is evaluated. Therefore, we propose a participatory approach to CESS evaluation. It focuses on (1) the concrete contexts in which CESS takes place, (2) reflective and dialogical learning processes, and (3) how to be democratic and inclusive. In particular, this approach to CESS evaluation is akin to realist evaluation, dialogical evaluation, and responsive evaluation. An example of a participatory approach to evaluating CESS is presented and some critical issues concerning this approach are discussed.
引用
收藏
页码:258 / 266
页数:9
相关论文
共 52 条
  • [21] A better way to evaluate clinical ethics consultations? An ecological approach
    Gordon, Elisa J.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS, 2007, 7 (02) : 26 - 29
  • [22] Gordon J., 2010, CLIN ETHICS CONSULTA, P37
  • [23] Guba E.G., 1989, Fourth Generation Evaluation
  • [24] Quality Attestation for Clinical Ethics Consultants: A Two-Step Model from the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities
    Kodish, Eric
    Fins, Joseph J.
    Braddock, Clarence, III
    Cohn, Felicia
    Dubler, Nancy Neveloff
    Danis, Marion
    Derse, Arthur R.
    Pearlman, Robert A.
    Smith, Martin
    Tarzian, Anita
    Youngner, Stuart
    Kuczewski, Mark G.
    [J]. HASTINGS CENTER REPORT, 2013, 43 (05) : 26 - 36
  • [25] Quality in ethics consultations
    Magill, Gerard
    [J]. MEDICINE HEALTH CARE AND PHILOSOPHY, 2013, 16 (04) : 761 - 774
  • [26] Is realist evaluation keeping its promise? A review of published empirical studies in the field of health systems research
    Marchal, Bruno
    van Belle, Sara
    van Olmen, Josefien
    Hoeree, Tom
    Kegels, Guy
    [J]. EVALUATION, 2012, 18 (02) : 192 - 212
  • [27] Beyond Recommendation and Mediation: Moral Case Deliberation as Moral Learning in Dialogue
    Metselaar, Suzanne
    Molewijk, Bert
    Widdershoven, Guy
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS, 2015, 15 (01) : 50 - 51
  • [28] Teaching ethics in the clinic. The theory and practice of moral case deliberation
    Molewijk, A. C.
    Abma, T.
    Stolper, M.
    Widdershoven, G.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 2008, 34 (02) : 120 - 124
  • [29] Molewijk B., 2013, CLIN ETHICS, V6, P5
  • [30] Musschenga B., 2010, SPECIAL ISSUE ETHICA, V2, P231