TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluating clinical ethics support
T2 - A participatory approach
AU - Metselaar, Suzanne
AU - Widdershoven, Guy
AU - Porz, Rouven
AU - Molewijk, Bert
PY - 2017/5/1
Y1 - 2017/5/1
N2 - The current process towards formalization within evaluation research, in particular the use of pre-set standards and the focus on predefined outcomes, implies a shift of ownership from the people who are actually involved in real clinical ethics support services (CESS) in a specific context to external stakeholders who increasingly gain a say in what ‘good CESS’ should look like. The question is whether this does justice to the insights and needs of those who are directly involved in actual CESS practices, be it as receivers or providers. We maintain that those actually involved in concrete CESS practices should also be involved in its evaluation, not only as respondents, but also in setting the agenda of the evaluation process and in articulating the criteria by which CESS is evaluated. Therefore, we propose a participatory approach to CESS evaluation. It focuses on (1) the concrete contexts in which CESS takes place, (2) reflective and dialogical learning processes, and (3) how to be democratic and inclusive. In particular, this approach to CESS evaluation is akin to realist evaluation, dialogical evaluation, and responsive evaluation. An example of a participatory approach to evaluating CESS is presented and some critical issues concerning this approach are discussed.
AB - The current process towards formalization within evaluation research, in particular the use of pre-set standards and the focus on predefined outcomes, implies a shift of ownership from the people who are actually involved in real clinical ethics support services (CESS) in a specific context to external stakeholders who increasingly gain a say in what ‘good CESS’ should look like. The question is whether this does justice to the insights and needs of those who are directly involved in actual CESS practices, be it as receivers or providers. We maintain that those actually involved in concrete CESS practices should also be involved in its evaluation, not only as respondents, but also in setting the agenda of the evaluation process and in articulating the criteria by which CESS is evaluated. Therefore, we propose a participatory approach to CESS evaluation. It focuses on (1) the concrete contexts in which CESS takes place, (2) reflective and dialogical learning processes, and (3) how to be democratic and inclusive. In particular, this approach to CESS evaluation is akin to realist evaluation, dialogical evaluation, and responsive evaluation. An example of a participatory approach to evaluating CESS is presented and some critical issues concerning this approach are discussed.
KW - Clinical ethics support
KW - Dialogue
KW - Evaluation
KW - Moral case deliberation
KW - Participation
KW - Responsive evaluation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85017593633&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/bioe.12348
DO - 10.1111/bioe.12348
M3 - Article
C2 - 28417517
AN - SCOPUS:85017593633
SN - 0269-9702
VL - 31
SP - 258
EP - 266
JO - Bioethics
JF - Bioethics
IS - 4
ER -