title: Secondary use of empirical research data in medical ethics papers on gamete donation: forms of use and pitfalls.
abstract: This paper aims to provide a description of how authors publishing in medical ethics journals have made use of empirical research data in papers on the topic of gamete or embryo donation by means of references to studies conducted by others (secondary use). Rather than making a direct contribution to the theoretical methodological literature about the role empirical research data could play or should play in ethics studies, the focus is on the particular uses of these data and the problems that can be encountered with this use. In the selection of papers examined, apart from being used to describe the context, empirical evidence was mainly used to recount problems that needed solving. Few of the authors looked critically at the quality of the studies they quoted, and several instances were found of empirical data being used poorly or inappropriately. This study provides some initial baseline evidence that shows empirical data, in the form of references to studies, are sometimes being used in inappropriate ways. This suggests that medical ethicists should be more concerned about the quality of the empirical data selected, the appropriateness of the choice for a particular type of data (from a particular type of study) and the correct integration of this evidence in sound argumentation. Given that empirical data can be misused also when merely cited instead of reported, it may be worthwhile to explore good practice requirements for this type of use of empirical data in medical ethics.
authors.affiliation: Bioethics Institute Ghent, Department of Philosophy and Moral Sciences, Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, 9000, Ghent, Belgium, veerle@provoost.org.
authors.forename: Veerle
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Provoost
mesh_terms: D036262:Empirical Research; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D006801:Humans; D007316:Insemination, Artificial, Heterologous / Q000941:ethics*; D018587:Oocyte Donation / Q000941:ethics*
references.citation: Dev World Bioeth. 2013 Dec;13(3):119-24
references.pmid: 22708805
references.citation: Health Care Anal. 2003 Mar;11(1):3-13
references.pmid: 14510305
references.citation: Am J Bioeth. 2009;9(6-7):59-65
references.pmid: 19998120
references.citation: Bioethics. 2010 Oct;24(8):439-44
references.pmid: 19438442
references.citation: Am J Bioeth. 2001 Fall;1(4):3-13
references.pmid: 11954633
references.citation: Hastings Cent Rep. 2010 Mar-Apr;40(2):3
references.pmid: 20391841
references.citation: Hastings Cent Rep. 2010 Mar-Apr;40(2):25-36
references.pmid: 20391847
references.citation: Med Law Rev. 2013 Mar;21(2):173-212
references.pmid: 23082030
references.citation: Am J Bioeth. 2001 Fall;1(4):29-30
references.pmid: 11954632
references.citation: Bioethics. 2005 Feb;19(1):49-71
references.pmid: 15812972
references.citation: BMC Med Ethics. 2012 Apr 13;13:5
references.pmid: 22500496
references.citation: J Bioeth Inq. 2013 Oct;10(3):369-81
references.pmid: 23780686
references.citation: J Med Ethics. 2008 Apr;34(4):281-4
references.pmid: 18375682
references.citation: Am J Bioeth. 2001 Fall;1(4):15-6
references.pmid: 11954622
references.citation: Am J Bioeth. 2001 Fall;1(4):26-7
references.pmid: 11954630
references.citation: Am J Bioeth. 2001 Fall;1(4):25-6
references.pmid: 11954629
references.citation: Bioethics. 2004 Apr;18(2):120-143
references.pmid: 15146853
references.citation: J Med Ethics. 1999 Jun;25(3):219-20
references.pmid: 10390674
references.citation: Am J Bioeth. 2001 Fall;1(4):W1
references.pmid: 12858870
references.citation: Med Health Care Philos. 2004;7(1):41-53
references.pmid: 15139254
references.citation: Am J Bioeth. 2001 Fall;1(4):23-5
references.pmid: 11954628
references.citation: Bioethics. 2013 Jul;27(6):317-24
references.pmid: 23718825
references.citation: Bioethics. 2010 Jun;24(5):256-65
references.pmid: 20500762
references.citation: Am J Bioeth. 2009;9(6-7):66-7
references.pmid: 19998121
references.citation: Hum Reprod. 2009 Aug;24(8):1909-19
references.pmid: 19398766
references.citation: Med Health Care Philos. 2004;7(1):71-9
references.pmid: 15139256
references.citation: Am J Bioeth. 2001 Fall;1(4):20-1
references.pmid: 11954626
references.citation: J Med Ethics. 2008 May;34(5):414
references.pmid: 18448728
references.citation: Am J Bioeth. 2001 Fall;1(4):1-2
references.pmid: 11954620
references.citation: Am J Bioeth. 2001 Fall;1(4):18
references.pmid: 11954624
references.citation: Am J Bioeth. 2001 Fall;1(4):28-9
references.pmid: 11954631
references.citation: Am J Bioeth. 2001 Fall;1(4):W3
references.pmid: 12858872
references.citation: J Med Ethics. 2008 Mar;34(3):162-6
references.pmid: 18316456
references.citation: Med Law Rev. 2013 Autumn;21(4):519-52
references.pmid: 23674719
references.citation: Am J Bioeth. 2013;13(5):33-41
references.pmid: 23557045
references.citation: J Med Ethics. 2006 Apr;32(4):240-5
references.pmid: 16574880
references.citation: Bioethics. 2008 Mar;22(3):166-78
references.pmid: 18257803
references.citation: Bioethics. 2010 Nov;24(9):490-8
references.pmid: 19438441
references.citation: Med Health Care Philos. 2004;7(1):55-69
references.pmid: 15139255
references.citation: Bioethics. 2012 May;26(4):198-206
references.pmid: 21039690
references.citation: Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2012 Oct;21(4):466-80
references.pmid: 22828041
references.citation: Bioethics. 2001 Oct;15(5-6):473-84
references.pmid: 12058771
references.citation: Hastings Cent Rep. 2005 Jul-Aug;35(4):40-7
references.pmid: 16225305