Literature DB >> 16507659

Review of measurement instruments in clinical and research ethics, 1999-2003.

B K Redman1.   

Abstract

Every field of practice has the responsibility to evaluate its outcomes and to test its theories. Evidence of the underdevelopment of measurement instruments in bioethics suggests that attending to strengthening existing instruments and developing new ones will facilitate the interpretation of accumulating bodies of research as well as the making of clinical judgements. A review of 65 instruments reported in the published literature showed 10 with even a minimal level of psychometric data. Two newly developed instruments provide examples of the full use of psychometric and ethical theory. Bioethicists use a wide range of methods for knowledge development and verification; each method should meet stringent standards of quality.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16507659      PMCID: PMC2564469          DOI: 10.1136/jme.2005.012567

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  31 in total

1.  Preferences for care near the end of life: scale development and validation.

Authors:  D M Gauthier; R D Froman
Journal:  Res Nurs Health       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 2.228

2.  Development and evaluation of a moral distress scale.

Authors:  M C Corley; R K Elswick; M Gorman; T Clor
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 3.187

3.  A measure of informed choice.

Authors:  T M Marteau; E Dormandy; S Michie
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 3.377

4.  Resilience and distress among amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients and caregivers.

Authors:  J G Rabkin; G J Wagner; M Del Bene
Journal:  Psychosom Med       Date:  2000 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 4.312

5.  Quality of informed consent: a new measure of understanding among research subjects.

Authors:  S Joffe; E F Cook; P D Cleary; J W Clark; J C Weeks
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2001-01-17       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  The development and psychometric evaluation of the Ethical Issues Scale.

Authors:  S T Fry; M E Duffy
Journal:  J Nurs Scholarsh       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 3.176

7.  Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  S Joffe; E F Cook; P D Cleary; J W Clark; J C Weeks
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-11-24       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Depression, hopelessness, and desire for hastened death in terminally ill patients with cancer.

Authors:  W Breitbart; B Rosenfeld; H Pessin; M Kaim; J Funesti-Esch; M Galietta; C J Nelson; R Brescia
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000-12-13       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Children's competence for assent and consent: a review of empirical findings.

Authors:  Victoria A Miller; Dennis Drotar; Eric Kodish
Journal:  Ethics Behav       Date:  2004
View more
  5 in total

1.  Assessment of psychosocial outcomes in genetic counseling research: an overview of available measurement scales.

Authors:  Nadine A Kasparian; Claire E Wakefield; Bettina Meiser
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2007-08-13       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Patient autonomy and informed consent--individual preferences of senior study participants in Germany.

Authors:  Wolfgang Strube; Florian Steger
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2012-06-13       Impact factor: 1.704

3.  New phosphate langbeinites, K2MTi(PO4)3 (M = Er, Yb or Y), and an alternative description of the langbeinite framework.

Authors:  Stefan T Norberg
Journal:  Acta Crystallogr B       Date:  2002-09-24

4.  Evidence-based ethics--what it should be and what it shouldn't.

Authors:  Daniel Strech
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2008-10-20       Impact factor: 2.652

5.  A Scoping Review of Empirical Research Relating to Quality and Effectiveness of Research Ethics Review.

Authors:  Stuart G Nicholls; Tavis P Hayes; Jamie C Brehaut; Michael McDonald; Charles Weijer; Raphael Saginur; Dean Fergusson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-30       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.