MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165940070 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049214

Which ethical values underpin England’s National Health Service reset of paediatric and maternity services following COVID-19: a rapid review

2021· review· en· W3165940070 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Chiumento, Paul Baines, Caroline Redhead, Sara Fovargue, Heather Draper, Lucy Frith

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Impact on Reproduction
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Population and Public Health
FundersArts and Humanities Research CouncilUniversity of MelbourneUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsMedicineGovernment (linguistics)Reciprocity (cultural anthropology)UnderpinningPublic engagementPublic healthService delivery frameworkNormativeInclusion (mineral)NursingPatient safetyPublic relationsHealth careService (business)SociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To identify ethical values guiding decision making in resetting non-COVID-19 paediatric surgery and maternity services in the National Health Service (NHS). Design A rapid review of academic and grey literature sources from 29 April to 31 December 2020, covering non-urgent, non-COVID-19 healthcare. Sources were thematically synthesised against an adapted version of the UK Government’s Pandemic Flu Ethical Framework to identify underpinning ethical principles. The strength of normative engagement and the quality of the sources were also assessed. Setting NHS maternity and paediatric surgery services in England. Results Searches conducted 8 September–12 October 2020, and updated in March 2021, identified 48 sources meeting the inclusion criteria. Themes that arose include: staff safety; collaborative working – including mutual dependencies across the healthcare system; reciprocity; and inclusivity in service recovery, for example, by addressing inequalities in service access. Embedded in the theme of staff and patient safety is embracing new ways of working, such as the rapid roll out of telemedicine. On assessment, many sources did not explicitly consider how ethical principles might be applied or balanced against one another. Weaknesses in the policy sources included a lack of public and user involvement and the absence of monitoring and evaluation criteria. Conclusions Our findings suggest that relationality is a prominent ethical principle informing resetting NHS non-COVID-19 paediatric surgery and maternity services. Sources explicitly highlight the ethical importance of seeking to minimise disruption to caring and dependent relationships, while simultaneously attending to public safety. Engagement with ethical principles was ethics-lite, with sources mentioning principles in passing rather than explicitly applying them. This leaves decision makers and healthcare professionals without an operationalisable ethical framework to apply to difficult reset decisions and risks inconsistencies in decision making. We recommend further research to confirm or refine the usefulness of the reset phase ethical framework developed through our analysis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.265
GPT teacher head0.550
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicCOVID-19 Impact on ReproductionFrench-language works237,207