Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 1596340

Using faculty consensus to develop and implement a medical ethics course.

Abstract

This report describes the development and implementation of a new required course in medical ethics for second-year medical students at the Cornell University Medical College, 1988-89 and 1989-90. The course was specifically designed to teach students who had not yet started their clinical clerkships to think critically and systematically about ethical issues faced by practicing physicians. The goals, structure, and content of the course were developed using an innovative technique, a planning model involving faculty consensus. The faculty members found the planning sessions intellectually challenging and enjoyable, and reported that the sessions added greatly to their teaching of the course. The students' evaluations over the first two years of the course (with 188 of the 201 students--94%--responding) documented the students' satisfaction with the content and the structure of the course, and their belief that the course had achieved its goals. The authors conclude that the faculty's participation in the planning process was crucial to the success of the course.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

K L Ales, M E Charlson, P Williams-Russo, J P Allegrante. 1992. Using faculty consensus to develop and implement a medical ethics course.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199206000-00013

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Informed consent in emergency research. Consensus statement from the Coalition Conference of Acute Resuscitation and Critical Care Researchers.

OBJECTIVE: A coalition conference of acute resuscitation researchers was held to discuss the feasibility of applying current federal research regulations regarding informed consent to the emergency setting. This article presents consensus recommendations for regulatory changes for consent in emergency research. PARTICIPANTS: Representatives from the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine and the American Heart Association identified several professional organizations as stakeholders in this issue, including research, clinical, bioethics, legal, and patient advocacy groups. The Office for Protection From Research Risks (OPRR), the Food And Drug Administration (FDA), and staff from specific legislative offices were also invited to observe. Forty-three participants attended, including representatives from 12 professional organizations, five medical institutions, and the FDA and OPRR. This was a closed meeting. Participants were self-funded or sponsored by their professional organizations. EVIDENCE: Before the meeting, a draft of a position statement was developed by the conference organizers based on the current literature and discussions with experts in the field. This draft, copies of the current federal research regulations, and supporting articles were distributed before the conference. CONSENSUS PROCESS: Participants rotated through moderated discussion sessions to comment on subsections of the draft. Following discussion, a working draft was developed and distributed to each participant and represented organizational board for final review. All comments were considered in the final version of the document. CONCLUSIONS: We believe there are circumstances when it is not feasible to obtain prospective or proxy consent for enrollment into an emergency research protocol. In these circumstances, patients are vulnerable, not only to research risks, but also to being denied potentially beneficial therapy when there is no known effective treatment for their life-threatening condition. We offer recommendations that should be met when the critical nature of the illness or injury or the need to apply an investigational therapy rapidly precludes prospective consent for participation in emergency research.

Consensus