Deliberative procedures can be useful when researchers need (a) an informed opinion that is difficult to obtain using other methods, (b) individual opinions that will benefit from group discussion and insight, and/or (c) group judgments because the issue at hand affects groups, communities, or citizens qua citizens. Deliberations generally gather non-professional members of the public to discuss, deliberate, and learn about a topic, often forming a policy recommendation or casting an informed vote. Researchers can collect data on these recommendations, and/or individuals’ preexisting or post hoc knowledge or opinions. This chapter presents examples of deliberative methods and how they may inform bioethical perspectives and reviews methodological issues deserving special attention.
Content analysis is a family of systematic, rule-guided techniques used to analyze the informational contents of textual data (Mayring, 2000). It is used frequently in nursing research, and is rapidly becoming more prominent in the medical and bioethics literature. There are several types of content analysis including quantitative and qualitative methods all sharing the central feature of systematically categorizing textual data in order to make sense of it (Miles & Huberman, 1994). They differ, however, in the ways they generate categories and apply them to the data, and how they analyze the resulting data. In this chapter, we describe a type of qualitative content analysis in which categories are largely derived from the data, applied to the data through close reading, and analyzed solely qualitatively. The generation and application of categories that we describe can also be used in studies that include quantitative analysis.
To meet the multidimensional needs of patients, health services are increasingly implementing complex programmes of care through partnerships between public, private and…
To meet the multidimensional needs of patients, health services are increasingly implementing complex programmes of care through partnerships between public, private and voluntary sector organisations. The purpose of this paper is to explore the implementation process of a complex, multi-innovative regional health and social care partnership to coordinate end-of-life care in the South East of England.
The study adopted a pragmatic, pluralist design using primarily qualitative methods including observations, interviews, focus group and document review. Implementation theory provided the research framework.
While progress was made towards greater collaboration in the provision of end-of-life care, regional coordination of care among the 13 partner organisations was not achieved as envisioned. Low engagement stemming from national health system changes delayed decision making and shifted partners’ priorities. Individual stakeholder interest and motivation carried the elements that were successful.
The external political and economic environment hindered the involvement of some of the partners and suggests that a concept of “project resiliency” is particularly important for complex, multi-organisational projects which are implemented over time and by multiple stakeholders from different sectors. Future research should look further at what contributes to project resiliency and whether it might be operationalized so that projects can develop resilient factors for success.
Project resiliency is a new concept that bridges a gap in understanding how time-limited multi-organisational projects function amid a changing environment.
In recent years, concerns over how to use the results of scientific advances, changing expectations of how medical decisions are made, and questions about the implications of demographic changes have raised ethical challenges regarding allocation of resources, justice, and patient autonomy. Bioethics – no longer the singular purview of moral philosophy – is now accepted as a legitimate field in the academic health sciences and is helping to guide policy and clinical decision-making. To achieve its full potential, it must seamlessly integrate the methods of the humanities, social sciences and medical sciences.