In this chapter we reflect on the relevance of peer review for assessing the quality of clinical ethics consultation. We contend that peer review in the narrative form as presented in this book provides an alternative to the formal clinical ethics consultation review procedures typically found in the clinical ethics literature. We elaborate on peer review as a reflection on clinical ethics consultation practice, the elements which a story should contain in order to provide a basis for peer review, and the differences between the assessments of the peer reviewers. We argue that a narrative approach to assessing the quality of ethics consultation can be further developed by allowing all stakeholders who are involved in the clinical ethics practice to actively take part in the evaluation process, following a “responsive evaluation” approach. An example of this is creating a Community of Practice, the aim of which is to foster a joint learning process of all parties involved. At the end of this chapter, we draw conclusions on peer review as a dialogical tool for evaluating quality of clinical ethics consultation.
|Title of host publication||Peer Review, Peer Education, and Modeling in the Practice of Clinical Ethics Consultation: The Zadeh Project|
|Publisher||Springer International Publishing|
|Publication status||Published - 2018|
|Name||Peer Review, Peer Education, and Modeling in the Practice of Clinical Ethics Consultation: The Zadeh Project|
Widdershoven, G. A. M., Molewijk, B., & Metselaar, S. (2018). Peer review and beyond: Towards a dialogical approach of quality in ethics support. In Peer Review, Peer Education, and Modeling in the Practice of Clinical Ethics Consultation: The Zadeh Project (pp. 193-203). (Peer Review, Peer Education, and Modeling in the Practice of Clinical Ethics Consultation: The Zadeh Project). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90955-4_14