What is it about?
In medicine and neighbouring clinical research, a paradigm of quantitative research is prevailing. Reserach projects using qualitative research methods challenge medical ethics comittees due to these methods' open approach characterized by circularity and subjectivity. How can these be (better) dealt with by medical ethics comittees?
Featured Image
Why is it important?
The Helsinki declaration even in its latest version defines as a primary, central goal of clinical research: "generate knowledge to understand the causes, development and effects of diseases". To "understand" implies hermeneutics and subjectivity as championed in qualitative empirical research - in contrast to models of causality which strive to explain as championed with quantitative methods. Medical ethics comittees, therefore, ought to be able to deal with qualitative research projects and their implications competently, too. This would ensure a more adequate review of ethical viability and empower researchers in their approach.
Perspectives
Patient oriented medical care needs both kinds of knowledge, insights based on quantitative data and on qualitative data, with their corresponding analyses and discussions of findings. This paper is also a plea, in occasion of 60 years of Helsinki Declaration, for medical comittees to take seriously qualitative research and to free it from its marginalization in medical and related research.
Klaus Baumann
Albert-Ludwigs-Universitat Freiburg
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Subjektivität und Kontext: Überlegungen und Empfehlungen zur medizinethischen Begutachtung qualitativer Forschung, Zeitschrift für medizinische Ethik, February 2025, De Gruyter,
DOI: 10.30965/29498570-20250107.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
