Hide metadata

dc.contributor.authorSvantesson, Mia
dc.contributor.authorKarlsson, Jan
dc.contributor.authorBoitte, Pierre
dc.contributor.authorSchildman, Jan
dc.contributor.authorDauwerse, Linda
dc.contributor.authorWiddershoven, Guy
dc.contributor.authorPedersen, Reidar
dc.contributor.authorHuisman, Martijn
dc.contributor.authorMolewijk, Bert
dc.date.accessioned2015-10-20T12:44:33Z
dc.date.available2015-10-20T12:44:33Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.identifier.citationBMC Medical Ethics. 2014 Apr 08;15(1):30
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10852/47249
dc.description.abstractBackground Clinical ethics support, in particular Moral Case Deliberation, aims to support health care providers to manage ethically difficult situations. However, there is a lack of evaluation instruments regarding outcomes of clinical ethics support in general and regarding Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) in particular. There also is a lack of clarity and consensuses regarding which MCD outcomes are beneficial. In addition, MCD outcomes might be context-sensitive. Against this background, there is a need for a standardised but flexible outcome evaluation instrument. The aim of this study was to develop a multi-contextual evaluation instrument measuring health care providers’ experiences and perceived importance of outcomes of Moral Case Deliberation. Methods A multi-item instrument for assessing outcomes of Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) was constructed through an iterative process, founded on a literature review and modified through a multistep review by ethicists and health care providers. The instrument measures perceived importance of outcomes before and after MCD, as well as experienced outcomes during MCD and in daily work. A purposeful sample of 86 European participants contributed to a Delphi panel and content validity testing. The Delphi panel (n = 13), consisting of ethicists and ethics researchers, participated in three Delphi-rounds. Health care providers (n = 73) participated in the content validity testing through ‘think-aloud’ interviews and a method using Content Validity Index. Results The development process resulted in the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcomes Instrument (Euro-MCD), which consists of two sections, one to be completed before a participant’s first MCD and the other after completing multiple MCDs. The instrument contains a few open-ended questions and 26 specific items with a corresponding rating/response scale representing various MCD outcomes. The items were categorised into the following six domains: Enhanced emotional support, Enhanced collaboration, Improved moral reflexivity, Improved moral attitude, Improvement on organizational level and Concrete results. Conclusions A tentative instrument has been developed that seems to cover main outcomes of Moral Case Deliberation. The next step will be to test the Euro-MCD in a field study.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.rightsSvantesson et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
dc.rightsAttribution 2.0 Generic
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
dc.titleOutcomes of Moral Case Deliberation - the development of an evaluation instrument for clinical ethics support (the Euro-MCD)
dc.typeJournal article
dc.date.updated2015-10-20T12:44:33Z
dc.creator.authorSvantesson, Mia
dc.creator.authorKarlsson, Jan
dc.creator.authorBoitte, Pierre
dc.creator.authorSchildman, Jan
dc.creator.authorDauwerse, Linda
dc.creator.authorWiddershoven, Guy
dc.creator.authorPedersen, Reidar
dc.creator.authorHuisman, Martijn
dc.creator.authorMolewijk, Bert
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6939-15-30
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:no-51373
dc.type.documentTidsskriftartikkel
dc.type.peerreviewedPeer reviewed
dc.identifier.fulltextFulltext https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/47249/1/12910_2013_Article_264.pdf
dc.type.versionPublishedVersion
cristin.articleid30


Files in this item

Appears in the following Collection

Hide metadata

Attribution 2.0 Generic
This item's license is: Attribution 2.0 Generic