Ethics networks have emerged over the last few decades as a mechanism for individuals and institutions over various regions, cities and states to converge on healthcare-related ethical issues. However, little is known about the development and nature of such networks. In an effort to fill the gap in the knowledge about such networks, a survey was conducted that evaluated the organizational structure, missions and functions, as well as the outcomes/products of ethics networks across the country. Eighteen established bioethics networks were (...) identified via consensus of three search processes and were approached for participation. The participants completed a survey developed for the purposes of this study and distributed via SurveyMonkey. Responses were obtained from 10 of the 18 identified and approached networks regarding topic areas of: Network Composition and Catchment Areas; Network Funding and Expenses; Personnel; Services; and Missions and Accomplishments. Bioethics networks are designed primarily to bring ethics education and support to professionals and hospitals. They do so over specifically defined areas—states, regions, or communities—and each is concerned about how to stay financially healthy. At the same time, the networks work off different organizational models, either as stand-alone organizations or as entities within existing organizational structures. (shrink)

IntroductionClinical ethics committees (CECs) support and enhance communication and complex decision making, educate healthcare professionals and the public on ethical matters and maintain standards of care. However, a consistent approach to training members of CECs is lacking. A systematic scoping review was conducted to evaluate prevailing CEC training curricula to guide the design of an evidence-based approach.MethodsArksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews was used to evaluate prevailing accounts of CEC training published in six databases. Braun and Clarke’s (...) thematic analysis approach was adopted to thematically analyse data across different healthcare and educational settings.Results7370 abstracts were identified, 92 full-text articles were reviewed and 55 articles were thematically analysed to reveal four themes: the design, pedagogy, content and assessment of CEC curricula.ConclusionFew curricula employ consistent approaches to training. Many programmes fail to provide CEC trainees with sufficient knowledge, skills and experience to meet required competencies. Most programmes do not inculcate prevailing sociocultural, research, clinical and educational considerations into training processes nor provide longitudinal support for CEC trainees. Most CEC training programmes are not supported by host institutions threatening the sustainability of the programme and compromising effective assessment and longitudinal support of CEC trainees. While further reviews are required, this review underlines the need for host organisations to support and oversee a socioculturally appropriate ethically sensitive, clinically relevant longitudinal training, assessment and support process for CEC trainees if CECs are to meet their roles effectively. (shrink)