The Educational Ladder Model for Ethics Committees: Confidence and Change Flourishing Through Core Competency Development

Pape, Deborah A.; Manning, Suzanne

doi:10.1007/s10730-006-9021-2

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 11 publications

(6 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[38][39][40][41][42][43] Use of a scoping review also allows for the systematic extraction, synthesis and summarising of actionable and applicable information 44 in available literature 45,46 across a wide range of pedagogies, assessment contents and practice settings. [47][48][49][50][51] Levac et al's 52 adaptation of Arksey and O'Malley's 38 framework for scoping reviews was used to map key concepts, sources and types of evidences available to guide future research. 39,53,54 Levac et al's framework was also guided concurrently by the PRISMA-P 2015 checklist 45 and a 6-stage scoping review protocol was developed for this study.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Professionalism in Medicine – A Scoping Review of Assessment Tools from 1990 to 2018

Tay

Hee

et al. 2020

Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Medical professionalism enhances doctor-patient relationships and advances patient-centric care. However, despite its pivotal role, the concept of medical professionalism remains diversely understood, taught and thus poorly assessed with Singapore lacking a linguistically sensitive, context specific and culturally appropriate assessment tool. A scoping review of assessments of professionalism in medicine was thus carried out to better guide its understanding. Methods: Arksey and O’Malley’s (2005) approach to scoping reviews was used to identify appropriate publications featured in four databases published between 1 January 1990 and 31 December 2018. Seven members of the research team employed thematic analysis to evaluate the selected articles. Results: 3799 abstracts were identified, 138 full-text articles reviewed and 74 studies included. The two themes identified were the context-specific nature of assessments and competency-based stages in medical professionalism. Conclusions: Prevailing assessments of professionalism in medicine must contend with differences in setting, context and levels of professional development as these explicate variances found in existing assessment criteria and approaches. However, acknowledging the significance of context-specific competency-based stages in medical professionalism will allow the forwarding of guiding principles to aid the design of a culturally-sensitive and practical approach to assessing professionalism.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Professionalism in Medicine – A Scoping Review of Assessment Tools from 1990 to 2018

Tay

Hee

et al. 2020

Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An SSR of prevailing methods and tools to assess CECons is proposed to map the size and scope of available literature in peer-reviewed and grey literature studies [37][38][39][40][41]. The flexible nature of an SSR enables systematic extraction and synthesis of actionable and applicable information [42] across a wide range of practice settings [43,44], whilst summarizing available literature on CECons assessments [45,46] and circumnavigating limitations posed by a dearth of relevant literature [43,44,[47][48][49]. This data along with the identification of commonalities within CEC practice could lay the foundations for a consistent approach to assessing CECons [37][38][39][40][41].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating assessment tools of the quality of clinical ethics consultations: a systematic scoping review from 1992 to 2019

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Amidst expanding roles in education and policy making, questions have been raised about the ability of Clinical Ethics Committees (CEC) s to carry out effective ethics consultations (CECons). However recent reviews of CECs suggest that there is no uniformity to CECons and no effective means of assessing the quality of CECons. To address this gap a systematic scoping review of prevailing tools used to assess CECons was performed to foreground and guide the design of a tool to evaluate the quality of CECons. Methods: Guided by Levac et al's (2010) methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews, the research team performed independent literature reviews of accounts of assessments of CECons published in six databases. The included articles were independently analyzed using content and thematic analysis to enhance the validity of the findings. Results: Nine thousand sixty-six abstracts were identified, 617 full-text articles were reviewed, 104 articles were analyzed and four themes were identifiedthe purpose of the CECons evaluation, the various domains assessed, the methods of assessment used and the long-term impact of these evaluations. Conclusion: This review found prevailing assessments of CECons to be piecemeal due to variable goals, contextual factors and practical limitations. The diversity in domains assessed and tools used foregrounds the lack of minimum standards upheld to ensure baseline efficacy. To advance a contextually appropriate, culturally sensitive, program specific assessment tool to assess CECons, clear structural and competency guidelines must be established in the curation of CECons programs, to evaluate their true efficacy and maintain clinical, legal and ethical standards.

show abstract

“…Pape and Manning have criticised the ‘Hub and Spokes Strategy’ at the Joint Centre for Bioethics (see above) for ‘limited attention given to identifying and addressing knowledge and skill development of the ethics committee membership’, and they argue that there is a ‘need for some type of standardized core curriculum to support the training needs of the identified spokes’ 25. Presumably, Pape and Manning would also find fault with our Ethics Liaison Program, on the grounds that we do not insist that our liaisons comply with any formal requirements.…”

Section: Increasing Awareness Of and Involvement In Ethics Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Ethics Liaison Program: building a moral community

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ethicists often struggle to maintain institution-wide awareness of and commitment to medical ethics. At Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), we created the Ethics Liaison Program to address that challenge by making ethics part of the moral culture of the institution. Liaisons represent clinical and non-clinical areas throughout the medical centre. The liaison has a four-part role: to spread awareness and understanding of Ethics Programs among their coworkers; share information regarding ethical dilemmas in their work area with the members of the Ethics Support Service; review ethics activities and needs within their area; and undertake ethics-related projects. This paper lists the notable attributes of the Ethics Liaison Program, and describes the purpose and structure of the programme, its advantages and the challenges to implementing it. The Ethics Liaison Program has helped to make ethics part of the everyday culture at BIDMC, and other medical centres might benefit from the establishment of similar programmes.

show abstract

The Educational Ladder Model for Ethics Committees: Confidence and Change Flourishing Through Core Competency Development

Cited by 9 publications

References 11 publications

Assessing Professionalism in Medicine – A Scoping Review of Assessment Tools from 1990 to 2018

Assessing Professionalism in Medicine – A Scoping Review of Assessment Tools from 1990 to 2018

Evaluating assessment tools of the quality of clinical ethics consultations: a systematic scoping review from 1992 to 2019

The Ethics Liaison Program: building a moral community

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About