Literature DB >> 25835327

Secondary use of empirical research data in medical ethics papers on gamete donation: forms of use and pitfalls.

Veerle Provoost1.   

Abstract

This paper aims to provide a description of how authors publishing in medical ethics journals have made use of empirical research data in papers on the topic of gamete or embryo donation by means of references to studies conducted by others (secondary use). Rather than making a direct contribution to the theoretical methodological literature about the role empirical research data could play or should play in ethics studies, the focus is on the particular uses of these data and the problems that can be encountered with this use. In the selection of papers examined, apart from being used to describe the context, empirical evidence was mainly used to recount problems that needed solving. Few of the authors looked critically at the quality of the studies they quoted, and several instances were found of empirical data being used poorly or inappropriately. This study provides some initial baseline evidence that shows empirical data, in the form of references to studies, are sometimes being used in inappropriate ways. This suggests that medical ethicists should be more concerned about the quality of the empirical data selected, the appropriateness of the choice for a particular type of data (from a particular type of study) and the correct integration of this evidence in sound argumentation. Given that empirical data can be misused also when merely cited instead of reported, it may be worthwhile to explore good practice requirements for this type of use of empirical data in medical ethics.

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25835327     DOI: 10.1007/s40592-015-0029-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Monash Bioeth Rev        ISSN: 1321-2753


  43 in total

1.  No news here.

Authors:  G White
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 11.229

Review 2.  Constructing empirical bioethics: Foucauldian reflections on the empirical turn in bioethics research.

Authors:  Richard E Ashcroft
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2003-03

Review 3.  Embryo donation in Iran: an ethical review.

Authors:  Leila Afshar; Alireza Bagheri
Journal:  Dev World Bioeth       Date:  2012-06-18       Impact factor: 2.294

4.  Self-regulation, compensation, and the ethical recruitment of oocyte donors.

Authors:  Aaron D Levine
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  2010 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.683

5.  Is there an ethical problem here?

Authors:  John A Robertson
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  2010 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.683

6.  The birth of the empirical turn in bioethics.

Authors:  Pascal Borry; Paul Schotsmans; Kris Dierickx
Journal:  Bioethics       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 1.898

7.  What 'empirical turn in bioethics'?

Authors:  Samia Hurst
Journal:  Bioethics       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 1.898

8.  Is the HFEA's policy on compensating egg donors and egg sharers defensible?

Authors:  Stephen Wilkinson
Journal:  Med Law Rev       Date:  2012-10-18       Impact factor: 1.267

9.  The role of empirical research in bioethics.

Authors:  Alexander A Kon
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 11.229

Review 10.  Risk information provided to prospective oocyte donors in a preliminary phone call.

Authors:  A D Gurmankin
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 11.229

View more
  3 in total

1.  The use of empirical research in bioethics: a survey of researchers in twelve European countries.

Authors:  Tenzin Wangmo; Veerle Provoost
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2017-12-22       Impact factor: 2.652

2.  Mapping, framing, shaping: a framework for empirical bioethics research projects.

Authors:  Richard Huxtable; Jonathan Ives
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2019-11-27       Impact factor: 2.652

Review 3.  An update on the "empirical turn" in bioethics: analysis of empirical research in nine bioethics journals.

Authors:  Tenzin Wangmo; Sirin Hauri; Eloise Gennet; Evelyn Anane-Sarpong; Veerle Provoost; Bernice S Elger
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2018-02-07       Impact factor: 2.652

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.