Ethics of care in technology‐mediated healthcare practices: A scoping review

Author:

Ramvi Ellen1ORCID,Hellstrand Ingvil1ORCID,Jensen Ida Bruheim2ORCID,Gripsrud Birgitta Haga1ORCID,Gjerstad Brita2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Care and Ethics, Faculty of Health Sciences University of Stavanger Stavanger Norway

2. Institute for Social Work, Faculty of Social Sciences University of Stavanger Stavanger Norway

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundIntroducing new technologies into healthcare practices may challenge professionals' traditional care cultures. The aim of this review was to map how the ‘ethics of care’ theoretical framework informs empirical studies of technology‐mediated healthcare.MethodA scoping review was performed using eight electronic databases: CINAHL with full text, Academic Search Premier, MEDLINE, the Philosopher's Index, SocINDEX with Full Text, SCOPUS, APA PsycInfo and Web of Science. This was followed by citation tracking, and articles were assessed against the inclusion criteria.ResultsOf the 443 initial articles, 18 met the criteria and were included. We found that nine of the articles used the concept of ‘ethics of care’ (herein used interchangeably with the terms ‘feminist ethics’ or ‘relational ethics’) insubstantially. The remaining nine articles deployed care ethics (or its equivalent) substantially as an integrated theoretical framework and analytical tool. We found that several articles suggested an expansion of ethics of care to encompass technologies as part of contemporary care. Furthermore, ethics of care contributed to the empirical research by recognising both new relationships between patients and healthcare professionals as well as new ethical challenges.ConclusionEthics of care is sparsely used as a theoretical framework in empirical studies of technology‐mediated healthcare practices. The use of ethics of care in technology‐mediated care brings new dilemmas, relational tensions and vulnerabilities to the foreground. For ethics of care to be used more explicit in empirical studies, it is important that it is recognised by research community as an adequate, universal ethical theory.

Funder

Norges Forskningsråd

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Enhancing research inclusion: The importance of grey literature searches;Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences;2023-06-30

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3