22 found
Order:
  1. Working with Research Integrity—Guidance for Research Performing Organisations: The Bonn PRINTEGER Statement.Mira Zöller, Hub Zwart, Knut Vie, Krista Varantola, Marta Tazewell, Margit Sutrop, Thomas Saretzki, Sarah Rijcke, Barend Meulen, Inge Lerouge, Matthias Kaiser, Jacques Janssen, Ingrid Jacobsen, Serge Horbach, Bert Heinrichs, Gloria Fuster, Carlo Casonato, Henriette Bout, Giles Birchley, Sharon Bailey, Frank Anthun & Ellen-Marie Forsberg - 2018 - Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (4):1023-1034.
    This document presents the Bonn PRINTEGER Consensus Statement: Working with Research Integrity—Guidance for research performing organisations. The aim of the statement is to complement existing instruments by focusing specifically on institutional responsibilities for strengthening integrity. It takes into account the daily challenges and organisational contexts of most researchers. The statement intends to make research integrity challenges recognisable from the work-floor perspective, providing concrete advice on organisational measures to strengthen integrity. The statement, which was concluded February 7th 2018, provides guidance on (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   27 citations  
  2. Working with Research Integrity—Guidance for Research Performing Organisations: The Bonn PRINTEGER Statement.Ellen-Marie Forsberg, Frank O. Anthun, Sharon Bailey, Giles Birchley, Henriette Bout, Carlo Casonato, Gloria González Fuster, Bert Heinrichs, Serge Horbach, Ingrid Skjæggestad Jacobsen, Jacques Janssen, Matthias Kaiser, Inge Lerouge, Barend van der Meulen, Sarah de Rijcke, Thomas Saretzki, Margit Sutrop, Marta Tazewell, Krista Varantola, Knut Jørgen Vie, Hub Zwart & Mira Zöller - 2018 - Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (4):1023-1034.
    This document presents the Bonn PRINTEGER Consensus Statement: Working with Research Integrity—Guidance for research performing organisations. The aim of the statement is to complement existing instruments by focusing specifically on institutional responsibilities for strengthening integrity. It takes into account the daily challenges and organisational contexts of most researchers. The statement intends to make research integrity challenges recognisable from the work-floor perspective, providing concrete advice on organisational measures to strengthen integrity. The statement, which was concluded February 7th 2018, provides guidance on (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   25 citations  
  3.  24
    Harm is all you need? Best interests and disputes about parental decision-making.Giles Birchley - 2016 - Journal of Medical Ethics 42 (2):111-115.
    A growing number of bioethics papers endorse the harm threshold when judging whether to override parental decisions. Among other claims, these papers argue that the harm threshold is easily understood by lay and professional audiences and correctly conforms to societal expectations of parents in regard to their children. English law contains a harm threshold which mediates the use of the best interests test in cases where a child may be removed from her parents. Using Diekema9s seminal paper as an example, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  4.  62
    The theorisation of ‘best interests’ in bioethical accounts of decision-making.Giles Birchley - 2021 - BMC Medical Ethics 22 (1):1-18.
    Background Best interests is a ubiquitous principle in medical policy and practice, informing the treatment of both children and adults. Yet theory underlying the concept of best interests is unclear and rarely articulated. This paper examines bioethical literature for theoretical accounts of best interests to gain a better sense of the meanings and underlying philosophy that structure understandings. Methods A scoping review of was undertaken. Following a literature search, 57 sources were selected and analysed using the thematic method. Results Three (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  5.  63
    Deciding Together? Best Interests and Shared Decision-Making in Paediatric Intensive Care.Giles Birchley - 2014 - Health Care Analysis 22 (3):203-222.
    In the western healthcare, shared decision making has become the orthodox approach to making healthcare choices as a way of promoting patient autonomy. Despite the fact that the autonomy paradigm is poorly suited to paediatric decision making, such an approach is enshrined in English common law. When reaching moral decisions, for instance when it is unclear whether treatment or non-treatment will serve a child’s best interests, shared decision making is particularly questionable because agreement does not ensure moral validity. With reference (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  6.  32
    The harm threshold and parents’ obligation to benefit their children.Giles Birchley - 2016 - Journal of Medical Ethics 42 (2):123-126.
    In an earlier paper entitled _Harm is all you need?_, I used an analysis of English law to claim that the harm threshold was an unsuitable mediator of the best interests test when deciding if parental decisions should be overruled. In this paper I respond to a number of commentaries of that paper, and extend my discussion to consider the claim that the harm threshold gives appropriate normative weight to the interests of parents. While I accept that parents have some (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  7.  31
    Fallacious, misleading and unhelpful: The case for removing ‘systematic review’ from bioethics nomenclature.Giles Birchley & Jonathan Ives - 2022 - Bioethics 36 (6):635-647.
    Attempts to conduct systematic reviews of ethical arguments in bioethics are fundamentally misguided. All areas of enquiry need thorough and informative literature reviews, and efforts to bring transparency and systematic methods to bioethics are to be welcomed. Nevertheless, the raw materials of bioethical articles are not suited to methods of systematic review. The eclecticism of philosophy may lead to suspicion of philosophical methods in bioethics. Because bioethics aims to influence medical and scientific practice it is tempting to adopt scientific language (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  8.  28
    Artificial intelligence in clinical decision‐making: Rethinking personal moral responsibility.Helen Smith, Giles Birchley & Jonathan Ives - 2023 - Bioethics 38 (1):78-86.
    Artificially intelligent systems (AISs) are being created by software developing companies (SDCs) to influence clinical decision‐making. Historically, clinicians have led healthcare decision‐making, and the introduction of AISs makes SDCs novel actors in the clinical decision‐making space. Although these AISs are intended to influence a clinician's decision‐making, SDCs have been clear that clinicians are in fact the final decision‐makers in clinical care, and that AISs can only inform their decisions. As such, the default position is that clinicians should hold responsibility for (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  9.  11
    Anything Goes? Analyzing Varied Understandings of Assent.Giles Birchley - 2023 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 32 (1):76-89.
    Assent to medical research or treatment may be an intuitively attractive way to address the area between incapacity and capacity that might otherwise be subject to a best interests assessment. Assent has become a widely disseminated concept in law, research, and clinical ethics, but little conceptual work on assent has so far occurred. An exploration of use of assent in treatment and research in children and people with dementia suggests that at least five claims are made on behalf of assent. (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  10.  12
    Principles for pandemics: COVID-19 and professional ethical guidance in England and Wales.Richard Huxtable, Jonathan Ives, Giles Birchley, Mari-Rose Kennedy, Peta Coulson-Smith & Helen Smith - 2021 - BMC Medical Ethics 22 (1):1-15.
    BackgroundDuring the arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic, various professional ethical guidance was issued to (and for) health and social care professionals in England and Wales. Guidance can help to inform and support such professionals and their patients, clients and service users, but a plethora of guidance risked information overload, confusion, and inconsistency. MethodsDuring the early months of the pandemic, we undertook a rapid review, asking: what are the principles adopted by professional ethical guidance in England and Wales for dealing with (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  11.  49
    Smart homes, private homes? An empirical study of technology researchers’ perceptions of ethical issues in developing smart-home health technologies.Giles Birchley, Richard Huxtable, Madeleine Murtagh, Ruud ter Meulen, Peter Flach & Rachael Gooberman-Hill - 2017 - BMC Medical Ethics 18 (1):23.
    Smart-home technologies, comprising environmental sensors, wearables and video are attracting interest in home healthcare delivery. Development of such technology is usually justified on the basis of the technology’s potential to increase the autonomy of people living with long-term conditions. Studies of the ethics of smart-homes raise concerns about privacy, consent, social isolation and equity of access. Few studies have investigated the ethical perspectives of smart-home engineers themselves. By exploring the views of engineering researchers in a large smart-home project, we sought (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  12.  20
    Implementation Science and Bioethics: Lessons From European Empirical Bioethics Research?Jonathan Ives, Giles Birchley & Richard Huxtable - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (4):80-82.
    Volume 20, Issue 4, May 2020, Page 80-82.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  13.  35
    A clear case for conscience in healthcare practice.Giles Birchley - 2012 - Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (1):13-17.
    The value of conscience in healthcare ethics is widely debated. While some sources present it as an unquestionably positive attribute, others question both the veracity of its decisions and the effect of conscientious objection on patient access to health care. This paper argues that the right to object conscientiously should be broadened, subject to certain previsos, as there are many benefits to healthcare practice in the development of the consciences of practitioners. While effects such as the preservation of moral integrity (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  14.  49
    What limits, if any, should be placed on a parent's right to consent and/or refuse to consent to medical treatment for their child?Giles Birchley - 2010 - Nursing Philosophy 11 (4):280-285.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  15.  27
    Have We Made Progress in Identifying (Surgical) Innovation?Giles Birchley, Richard Huxtable, Jonathan Ives & Jane Blazeby - 2019 - American Journal of Bioethics 19 (6):25-27.
    Volume 19, Issue 6, June 2019, Page 25-27.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  16.  48
    Charlie Gard and the weight of parental rights to seek experimental treatment.Giles Birchley - 2018 - Journal of Medical Ethics 44 (7):448-452.
    The case of Charlie Gard, an infant with a genetic illness whose parents sought experimental treatment in the USA, brought important debates about the moral status of parents and children to the public eye. After setting out the facts of the case, this article considers some of these debates through the lens of parental rights. Parental rights are most commonly based on the promotion of a child’s welfare; however, in Charlie’s case, promotion of Charlie’s welfare cannot explain every fact of (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  17.  24
    The Harm Principle and the Best Interests Standard: Are Aspirational or Minimal Standards the Key?Giles Birchley - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (8):32-34.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  18.  52
    Dying well with reduced agency: a scoping review and thematic synthesis of the decision-making process in dementia, traumatic brain injury and frailty.Giles Birchley, Kerry Jones, Richard Huxtable, Jeremy Dixon, Jenny Kitzinger & Linda Clare - 2016 - BMC Medical Ethics 17 (1):46.
    BackgroundIn most Anglophone nations, policy and law increasingly foster an autonomy-based model, raising issues for large numbers of people who fail to fit the paradigm, and indicating problems in translating practical and theoretical understandings of ‘good death’ to policy. Three exemplar populations are frail older people, people with dementia and people with severe traumatic brain injury. We hypothesise that these groups face some over-lapping challenges in securing good end-of-life care linked to their limited agency. To better understand these challenges, we (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  19.  67
    Doctor? Who? Nurses, patient's best interests and treatment withdrawal: when no doctor is available, should nurses withdraw treatment from patients?Giles Birchley - 2013 - Nursing Philosophy 14 (2):96-108.
    Where a decision has been made to stop futile treatment of critically ill patients on an intensive care unit – what is termed withdrawal of treatment in the UK – yet no doctor is available to perform the actions of withdrawal, nurses may be called upon to perform key tasks. In this paper I present two moral justifications for this activity by offering answers to two major questions. One is to ask if it can be in patients' best interests for (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  20. Critical decisions for critically ill infants : principles, processes, problems.Giles Birchley & Richard Huxtable - 2015 - In Catherine Stanton, Sarah Devaney, Anne-Maree Farrell & Alexandra Mullock (eds.), Pioneering Healthcare Law: Essays in Honour of Margaret Brazier. New York, NY: Routledge.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21.  23
    Conceptualising Surgical Innovation: An Eliminativist Proposal.Giles Birchley, Jonathan Ives, Richard Huxtable & Jane Blazeby - 2020 - Health Care Analysis 28 (1):73-97.
    Improving surgical interventions is key to improving outcomes. Ensuring the safe and transparent translation of such improvements is essential. Evaluation and governance initiatives, including the IDEAL framework and the Macquarie Surgical Innovation Identification Tool have begun to address this. Yet without a definition of innovation that allows non-surgeons to identify when it is occurring, these initiatives are of limited value. A definition seems elusive, so we undertook a conceptual study of surgical innovation. This indicated common conceptual areas in discussions of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22.  6
    Perspectives on the role of the nurse ethicist.Jenny Jones, Paul J. Ford, Giles Birchley & Settimio Monteverde - 2023 - Nursing Ethics 30 (5):652-658.
    This paper offers four contrasting perspectives on the role of the nurse ethicist from authors based in different areas of world, with different professional backgrounds and at different career stages. Each author raises questions about how to understand the role of the nurse ethicist. The first author reflects upon their career, the scope and purpose of their work, ultimately arguing that the distinction between ‘nurse ethicist’ and ‘clinical ethicist’ is largely irrelevant. The second author describes the impact and value that (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark