How to read an ethics paper
Open accessAbstract
In recent decades, evidence-based medicine has become one of the foundations of clinical practice, making it necessary that healthcare practitioners develop keen critical appraisal skills for scientific papers. Worksheets to guide clinicians through this critical appraisal are often used in journal clubs, a key part of continuing medical education. A similar need is arising for health professionals to develop skills in the critical appraisal of medical ethics papers. Medicine is increasingly ethically complex, and there is a growing medical ethics literature that modern practitioners need to be able to use in their practice. In addition, clinical ethics services are commonplace in healthcare institutions, and the lion’s share of the work done by these services is done by clinicians in addition to their usual roles. Education to support this work is important. In this paper, we present a worksheet designed to help busy healthcare practitioners critically appraise ethics papers relevant to clinical practice. In the first section, we explain what is different about ethics papers. We then describe how to work through the steps in our critical appraisal worksheet: identifying the point at issue; scrutinising definitions; dissecting the arguments presented; considering counterarguments; and finally deciding on relevance. Working through this reflective worksheet will help healthcare practitioners to use the ethics literature effectively in clinical practice. We also intend it to be a shared evaluative tool that can form the basis of professional discussion such as at ethics journal clubs. Practising these critical reasoning skills will also increase practitioners’ capacity to think through difficult ethical decisions in daily clinical practice.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Ethics articles were examined using the five-item ethics critical appraisal matrix by Jansen and Ellerton.
“ethics articles were examined using the five-item ethics critical appraisal matrix by Jansen and Ellerton.20”
From Social consequences of mass quarantine during epidemics: a systematic review with implications for the COVID-19 response (2020) · cites this paper as [20]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't
Sackett, D. L., Rosenberg, W. M. C., Gray, J. A. M., Haynes, R. B., & Richardson, W. S. (1996) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71 · Cited by 15,769 · see citing works
Yeh, M. (2014) · Journal of Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/jnr.0000000000000065 · Cited by 3,836 · see citing works
Ethics Consultation in United States Hospitals: A National Survey
Fox, E., Myers, S. K., & Pearlman, R. A. (2007) · The American Journal of Bioethics · doi:10.1080/15265160601109085 · Cited by 508 · see citing works
Tarzian, A. J., & Task, A. C. C. U. (2013) · The American Journal of Bioethics · doi:10.1080/15265161.2012.750388 · Cited by 186 · see citing works
Development of clinical ethics services in the UK: a national survey
Slowther, A., McClimans, L. M., & Price, C. (2011) · Journal of Medical Ethics · doi:10.1136/medethics-2011-100173 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Core competencies for clinical ethics committees
Larcher, V., Slowther, A., & Watson, A. R. (2010) · Clinical Medicine · doi:10.7861/clinmedicine.10-1-30 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Ethics Consultation in Children's Hospitals: Results From a Survey of Pediatric Clinical Ethicists
Kesselheim, J. C., JOHNSON, J. M., & Joffe, S. (2010) · PEDIATRICS · doi:10.1542/peds.2009-1813 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Godkin, M. D., Faith, K. E., Upshur, R. E. G., et al. (2005) · Journal of Medical Ethics · doi:10.1136/jme.2004.010595 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
13. How to read a journal article
Darzins, P. J., Smith, B. J., & Heller, R. F. (1992) · The Medical Journal of Australia · doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.1992.tb137249.x · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Paediatric clinical ethics in Australia and New Zealand: a survey
Cottle, E., Jansen, M., Irving, H. R., et al. (2017) · BMJ Paediatrics Open · doi:10.1136/bmjpo-2017-000156 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [2]Greenhalgh T How to read a paper: the basics of evience-based medicine. 5 edn Oxford, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2014.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Chu, I. Y.-H., Alam, P., Larson, H. J., & Lin, L. (2020) · Journal of Travel Medicine · doi:10.1093/jtm/taaa192 · Cited by 247 · see citing works
- Authors
- Jansen, M., & Ellerton, P.
- Affiliations
- The University of Queensland (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Jansen, Melanie
- Venue
- Journal of Medical Ethics
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2018-08-22
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 810-813
- ISSN
- 0306-6800 (ISSN-L)
- 1473-4257
- PMC
- PMC6288704
- OpenAlex
- W2888207877
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 10
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2
- FWCI
- 1.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc
- Locations
- Journal of Medical Ethics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Ethics in medical practice
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
- Keywords
- critical appraisal, clinical ethics, critical reasoning, clinical ethics education, argumentation analysis
- MeSH terms
- Education, Medical, Continuing, Ethics, Medical, Humans, Periodicals as Topic, Evidence-Based Medicine, Ethics, Clinical
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review