↓ Skip to main content

Domains of quality for clinical ethics case consultation: a mixed-method systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Domains of quality for clinical ethics case consultation: a mixed-method systematic review
Published in
Systematic Reviews, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13643-016-0273-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Louis Leslie, Rebecca Frances Cherry, Abbas Mulla, Jean Abbott, Kristin Furfari, Jacqueline J. Glover, Benjamin Harnke, Matthew K. Wynia

Abstract

"Clinical ethics consultation" (CEC) is the provision of consultative services by an individual or team with the aim of helping health professionals, patients, and their families grapple with difficult ethical issues arising during health care. There are almost 25,000 articles in the worldwide literature on CEC, but very few explicitly address measuring the quality of CEC. Many more address quality implicitly, however. This article describes a rigorous protocol for compiling the diverse literature on CEC, analyzing it with a quality measurement lens, and seeking a set of potential quality domains for CEC based on areas of existing, but hitherto unrecognized, consensus in the literature. This mixed-method systematic review will follow a sequential pattern: scoping review, qualitative synthesis, and then a quantitative synthesis. The scoping review will include categorizing all quality measures for CEC discussed in the literature, both quantitative and qualitative. The qualitative synthesis will generate a comprehensive analytic framework for understanding the quality of CEC and is expected to inform the quantitative synthesis, which will be a meta-analysis of studies reporting the effects of CEC on pre-specified clinical outcomes. The literature on CEC is broad and diverse and has never been examined with specific regard to quality measurement. We propose a novel mixed-methods approach to compile and synthesize this literature and to derive a framework for assessing quality in CEC. PROSPERO CRD42015023282.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 12%
Librarian 3 9%
Researcher 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 9 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 27%
Philosophy 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 6%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 10 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 June 2016.
All research outputs
#21,766,037
of 24,288,533 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#2,032
of 2,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#303,036
of 346,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#25
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,288,533 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,110 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 346,897 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.