Evidence-based ethics – What it should be and what it shouldn't
2008

Evidence-based ethics: What it should be and what it shouldn't

publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Daniel Strech

Primary Institution: Institute of Medical Ethics, University of Tübingen

Hypothesis

The article aims to clarify the concept of evidence-based ethics and its implications in ethical decision-making.

Conclusion

The use of the term 'evidence-based ethics' should be discouraged unless there is consensus on differentiating high- and low-quality information.

Supporting Evidence

  • The article discusses the increasing use of the term 'evidence-based ethics' in international journals.
  • It highlights the lack of consensus on what constitutes high-quality empirical information.
  • The author argues for the need for systematic reviews in ethical decision-making.

Takeaway

This study talks about how we should be careful when using the term 'evidence-based ethics' because we need to agree on what counts as good evidence first.

Methodology

The article presents a systematic analysis of the term 'evidence-based ethics' and discusses its descriptive and normative dimensions.

Potential Biases

There is a risk of bias if the criteria for what counts as evidence are not transparent or agreed upon.

Limitations

The article does not provide specific criteria for assessing the quality of empirical ethics research.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1186/1472-6939-9-16

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication