Current state of ethics literature synthesis: a systematic review of reviews

BMC Medicine

Research Article

Hannes Kahrass¹  Daniel Strech¹  Marcel Mertz² 

[1] Institute of History, Ethics and Philosophy of Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany;Institute of History, Ethics and Philosophy of Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany;Research Unit Ethics, Institute of History and Ethics of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany;

关键词: Systematic review;    Literature review;    Normative literature;    Argument-based literature;    Empirical ethics;    Bioethics;    Literature search;    Evidence-based medicine;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12916-016-0688-1

 received in 2016-06-29, accepted in 2016-09-08,  发布年份 2016

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundModern standards for evidence-based decision making in clinical care and public health still rely solely on eminence-based input when it comes to normative ethical considerations. Manuals for clinical guideline development or health technology assessment (HTA) do not explain how to search, analyze, and synthesize relevant normative information in a systematic and transparent manner. In the scientific literature, however, systematic or semi-systematic reviews of ethics literature already exist, and scholarly debate on their opportunities and limitations has recently bloomed.MethodsA systematic review was performed of all existing systematic or semi-systematic reviews for normative ethics literature on medical topics. The study further assessed how these reviews report on their methods for search, selection, analysis, and synthesis of ethics literature.ResultsWe identified 84 reviews published between 1997 and 2015 in 65 different journals and demonstrated an increasing publication rate for this type of review. While most reviews reported on different aspects of search and selection methods, reporting was much less explicit for aspects of analysis and synthesis methods: 31 % did not fulfill any criteria related to the reporting of analysis methods; for example, only 25 % of the reviews reported the ethical approach needed to analyze and synthesize normative information.ConclusionsWhile reviews of ethics literature are increasingly published, their reporting quality for analysis and synthesis of normative information should be improved. Guiding questions are: What was the applied ethical approach and technical procedure for identifying and extracting the relevant normative information units? What method and procedure was employed for synthesizing normative information? Experts and stakeholders from bioethics, HTA, guideline development, health care professionals, and patient organizations should work together to further develop this area of evidence-based health care.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s). 2016