↓ Skip to main content

What Ethical Issues Really Arise in Practice at an Academic Medical Center? A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis of Clinical Ethics Consultations from 2008 to 2013

Overview of attention for article published in HEC Forum, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#18 of 184)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
Title
What Ethical Issues Really Arise in Practice at an Academic Medical Center? A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis of Clinical Ethics Consultations from 2008 to 2013
Published in
HEC Forum, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10730-015-9293-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katherine Wasson, Emily Anderson, Erika Hagstrom, Michael McCarthy, Kayhan Parsi, Mark Kuczewski

Abstract

As the field of clinical ethics consultation sets standards and moves forward with the Quality Attestation process, questions should be raised about what ethical issues really do arise in practice. There is limited data on the type and number of ethics consultations conducted across different settings. At Loyola University Medical Center, we conducted a retrospective review of our ethics consultations from 2008 through 2013. One hundred fifty-six cases met the eligibility criteria. We analyzed demographic data on these patients and conducted a content analysis of the ethics consultation write-ups coding both the frequency of ethical issues and most significant, or key, ethical issue per case. Patients for whom ethics consultation was requested were typically male (55.8 %), white (57.1 %), between 50 and 69 years old (38.5 %), of non-Hispanic origin (85.9 %), and of Roman Catholic faith (43.6 %). Nearly half (47.4 %) were in the intensive care unit and 44.2 % died in the hospital. The most frequent broad ethical categories were decision-making (93.6 %), goals of care/treatment (80.8 %), and end-of-life (73.1 %). More specifically, capacity (57.1 %), patient's wishes/autonomy (54.5 %), and surrogate decision maker (51.3 %) were the most frequent particular ethical issues. The most common key ethical issues were withdrawing/withholding treatment (12.8 %), patient wishes/autonomy (12.2 %), and capacity (11.5 %). Our findings provide additional data to inform the training of clinical ethics consultants regarding the ethical issues that arise in practice. A wider research agenda should be formed to collect and compare data across institutions to improve education and training in our field.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Researcher 6 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 20 26%
Unknown 21 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Philosophy 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 24 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 10 February 2017.
All research outputs
#1,938,581
of 22,829,683 outputs
Outputs from HEC Forum
#18
of 184 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,826
of 274,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age from HEC Forum
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,683 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 184 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
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 274,274 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them