Clinical Ethics Informatics: An Initial Survey.

Context: Ethics consultation in the US is widely used and reported in the literature, but multi-site comparison studies and data sharing across institutions are largely unknown or at least unreported. Objective: To better understand the different methods used by ethics services to record, taxonomize...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Journal of Hospital Ethics Vol. 7; no. 1; pp. 26 - 36
Autor principal: Frye III, John W.
Formato: research tables/charts Journal Article
Publicado: MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Center for Ethics Fall2020
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=147492069&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 147492069
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        19384955
        FNKI
      jtl: Journal of Hospital Ethics
      issn: 19384955
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Fall2020
      vid: 7
      iid: 1
      pid: 82867
      pub: MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Center for Ethics
      place: Washington, District of Columbia
    artinfo:
      ui:
        147492069
        147492069
        147492069
        147492069
      ppf: 26
      ppct: 10
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
      tig:
        atl: Clinical Ethics Informatics: An Initial Survey.
      aug:
        au: Frye III, John W.
        affil: Adjunct professor of bioethics at CWRU
      sug:
        subj:
          Ethics Consultation
          Documentation
          Information Management
          Ethics, Medical
          Human
          Questionnaires
          Ethicists
          Fisher's Exact Test
          Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient
          Descriptive Statistics
          Content Analysis
      ab: Context: Ethics consultation in the US is widely used and reported in the literature, but multi-site comparison studies and data sharing across institutions are largely unknown or at least unreported. Objective: To better understand the different methods used by ethics services to record, taxonomize, analyze, and utilize data regarding their case consultations. Design: a 37-item questionnaire surveying persons who are "familiar with their ethics consultation database". Participants: A convenience sample of ethics service personnel recruited from several e-mail lists known to have ethics consultants among their subscribers. Results: A total of 53 unique surveys were completed. There was wide variety in institution's bed-size, consult volume, and ethics staffing among respondents. Recording practices for cases were similarly varied, with some institutions merely keeping paper documents with no analysis, others used spreadsheets with rudimentary analysis, and high-volume services employing specific programs or electronic medical record functions to provide a more robust analysis of various case features. The data recorded followed ASBH guidelines to varying degrees. Respondents reported a general desire for some standardization of recording methods and data types/inputs, which would be necessary before significant data sharing across institutions can be feasible or valuable.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        research
        tables/charts
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N