3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Which Framework to Use? A Systematic Review of Ethical Frameworks for the Screening or Evaluation of Health Technology Innovations

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Innovations permeate healthcare settings on an ever-increasing scale. Health technology innovations (HTIs) impact our perceptions and experiences of health, care, disease, etc. Because of the fast pace these HTIs are being introduced in different healthcare settings, there is a growing societal consensus that these HTIs need to be governed by ethical reflection. This paper reports a systematic review of argument-based literature which focused on articles reporting on ethical frameworks to screen or evaluate HTIs. To do this a four step methodology was followed: (1) Literature search conducted in five electronic literature databases; (2) Identification of relevant articles; (3) Development of data-extraction tool to analyze the included articles; (4) Analysis, synthesis of data and reporting of results. Fifty-seven articles were included, each reporting on a specific ethical framework. These ethical frameworks existed out of characteristics which were grouped into five common ones: (1) Motivations for development and use of frameworks; (2) Objectives of using frameworks; (3) Specific characteristics of frameworks (background context, scope, and focus); (4) Ethical approaches and concepts used in the frameworks; (5) Methods to use the frameworks. Although this multiplicity of ethical frameworks shows an increasing importance of ethically analyzing HTIs, it remains unclear what the specific role is of these analyses. An ethics of caution, on which ethical frameworks rely, guides HTIs in their design, development, implementation, without questioning their technological paradigm. An ethics of desirability questions this paradigm, without guiding HTIs. In the end, a place needs to be found in-between, to critically assess HTIs.

          Related collections

          Most cited references80

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration

          Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential to summarise evidence relating to efficacy and safety of healthcare interventions accurately and reliably. The clarity and transparency of these reports, however, are not optimal. Poor reporting of systematic reviews diminishes their value to clinicians, policy makers, and other users. Since the development of the QUOROM (quality of reporting of meta-analysis) statement—a reporting guideline published in 1999—there have been several conceptual, methodological, and practical advances regarding the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Also, reviews of published systematic reviews have found that key information about these studies is often poorly reported. Realising these issues, an international group that included experienced authors and methodologists developed PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) as an evolution of the original QUOROM guideline for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of evaluations of health care interventions. The PRISMA statement consists of a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram. The checklist includes items deemed essential for transparent reporting of a systematic review. In this explanation and elaboration document, we explain the meaning and rationale for each checklist item. For each item, we include an example of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature. The PRISMA statement, this document, and the associated website (www.prisma-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Developing a framework for responsible innovation

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              QUAGOL: a guide for qualitative data analysis.

              Data analysis is a complex and contested part of the qualitative research process, which has received limited theoretical attention. Researchers are often in need of useful instructions or guidelines on how to analyze the mass of qualitative data, but face the lack of clear guidance for using particular analytic methods. The aim of this paper is to propose and discuss the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven (QUAGOL), a guide that was developed in order to be able to truly capture the rich insights of qualitative interview data. The article describes six major problems researchers are often struggling with during the process of qualitative data analysis. Consequently, the QUAGOL is proposed as a guide to facilitate the process of analysis. Challenges emerged and lessons learned from own extensive experiences with qualitative data analysis within the Grounded Theory Approach, as well as from those of other researchers (as described in the literature), were discussed and recommendations were presented. Strengths and pitfalls of the proposed method were discussed in detail. The Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven (QUAGOL) offers a comprehensive method to guide the process of qualitative data analysis. The process consists of two parts, each consisting of five stages. The method is systematic but not rigid. It is characterized by iterative processes of digging deeper, constantly moving between the various stages of the process. As such, it aims to stimulate the researcher's intuition and creativity as optimal as possible. The QUAGOL guide is a theory and practice-based guide that supports and facilitates the process of analysis of qualitative interview data. Although the method can facilitate the process of analysis, it cannot guarantee automatic quality. The skills of the researcher and the quality of the research team remain the most crucial components of a successful process of analysis. Additionally, the importance of constantly moving between the various stages throughout the research process cannot be overstated. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Science and Engineering Ethics
                Sci Eng Ethics
                Springer Science and Business Media LLC
                1353-3452
                1471-5546
                June 2022
                May 31 2022
                June 2022
                : 28
                : 3
                Article
                10.1007/s11948-022-00377-2
                35639210
                5b92bf08-3162-40ea-a9de-8081423cfcd4
                © 2022

                https://www.springer.com/tdm

                https://www.springer.com/tdm

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article