Literature DB >> 25655982

Reviewing Literature in Bioethics Research: Increasing Rigour in Non-Systematic Reviews.

Rosalind McDougall.   

Abstract

The recent interest in systematic review methods in bioethics has highlighted the need for greater transparency in all literature review processes undertaken in bioethics projects. In this article, I articulate features of a good bioethics literature review that does not aim to be systematic, but rather to capture and analyse the key ideas relevant to a research question. I call this a critical interpretive literature review. I begin by sketching and comparing three different types of literature review conducted in bioethics scholarship. Then, drawing on Dixon-Wood's concept of critical interpretive synthesis, I put forward six features of a good critical interpretive literature review in bioethics: answering a research question, capturing the key ideas relevant to the research question, analysing the literature as a whole, generating theory, not excluding papers based on rigid quality assessment criteria, and reporting the search strategy.
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Keywords:  critical interpretive synthesis; literature review; methodology; systematic reviews

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25655982     DOI: 10.1111/bioe.12149

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bioethics        ISSN: 0269-9702            Impact factor:   1.898


  16 in total

Review 1.  Minors and euthanasia: a systematic review of argument-based ethics literature.

Authors:  Giulia Cuman; Chris Gastmans
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 3.183

2.  Instrumentalist analyses of the functions of ethics concept-principles: a proposal for synergetic empirical and conceptual enrichment.

Authors:  Eric Racine; M Ariel Cascio; Marjorie Montreuil; Aline Bogossian
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2019-08

3.  Ethics and Community-Based Rehabilitation: Eight Ethical Questions from a Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Stephen Clarke; Jessica Barudin; Matthew Hunt
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 1.037

4.  An integrated model of multimorbidity and symptom science.

Authors:  Toni Tripp-Reimer; Janet K Williams; Sue E Gardner; Barbara Rakel; Keela Herr; Ann Marie McCarthy; Linda Liu Hand; Stephanie Gilbertson-White; Catherine Cherwin
Journal:  Nurs Outlook       Date:  2020-05-29       Impact factor: 3.250

5.  A systematic review of the literature on ethical aspects of transitional care between child- and adult-orientated health services.

Authors:  Moli Paul; Lesley O'Hara; Priya Tah; Cathy Street; Athanasios Maras; Diane Purper Ouakil; Paramala Santosh; Giulia Signorini; Swaran Preet Singh; Helena Tuomainen; Fiona McNicholas
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2018-07-18       Impact factor: 2.652

Review 6.  Prioritising access to pandemic influenza vaccine: a review of the ethics literature.

Authors:  Jane H Williams; Angus Dawson
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2020-05-14       Impact factor: 2.652

Review 7.  Global health ethics: critical reflections on the contours of an emerging field, 1977-2015.

Authors:  Gail Robson; Nathan Gibson; Alison Thompson; Solomon Benatar; Avram Denburg
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2019-07-25       Impact factor: 2.652

Review 8.  Current state of ethics literature synthesis: a systematic review of reviews.

Authors:  Marcel Mertz; Hannes Kahrass; Daniel Strech
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2016-10-03       Impact factor: 8.775

Review 9.  Scrutinizing screening: a critical interpretive review of primary care provider perspectives on mammography decision-making with average-risk women.

Authors:  Sophia Siedlikowski; Carolyn Ells; Gillian Bartlett
Journal:  Public Health Rev       Date:  2018-04-23

10.  In pursuit of goodness in bioethics: analysis of an exemplary article.

Authors:  Bjørn Hofmann; Morten Magelssen
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2018-06-15       Impact factor: 2.652

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.