• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The American journal of bioethics: AJOB >Opening the Black Box of Ethics Policy Work: Evaluating a Covert Practice
【24h】

Opening the Black Box of Ethics Policy Work: Evaluating a Covert Practice

机译：打开道德政策工作的黑匣子：评估秘密实践

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Hospital ethics committees (HECs) and ethicists generally describe themselves as engaged in four domains of practice: case consultation, research, education, and policy work. Despite the increasing attention to quality indicators, practice standards, and evaluation methods for the other domains, comparatively little is known or published about the policy work of HECs or ethicists. This article attempts to open the "black box" of this health care ethics practice by providing two detailed case examples of ethics policy reviews. We also describe the development and application of an evaluation strategy to assess the quality of ethics policy review work, and to enable continuous improvement of ethics policy review processes. Given the potential for policy work to impact entire patient populations and organizational systems, it is imperative that HECs and ethicists develop clearer roles, responsibilities, procedural standards, and evaluation methods to ensure the delivery of consistent, relevant, and high-quality ethics policy reviews.
机译：医院伦理委员会（HEC）和伦理学家通常将自己描述为从事四个实践领域：病例咨询，研究，教育和政策工作。尽管人们越来越关注其他领域的质量指标，实践标准和评估方法，但对于HEC或伦理学家的政策工作知之甚少。本文通过提供两个详细的伦理政策审查案例实例，试图打开这种医疗伦理实践的“黑匣子”。我们还描述了评估策略的开发和应用，以评估道德政策审核工作的质量，并实现道德政策审核流程的不断改进。鉴于政策工作有可能影响整个患者人群和组织系统，因此，HEC和伦理学家必须明确角色，责任，程序标准和评估方法，以确保提供一致，相关且高质量的伦理政策审查。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号