Abstract:
PURPOSE : This systematic review aimed to update and explore the extant literature (2011–2020) regarding ethics knowledge in audiology and to compare the findings to an earlier study (2001–2010).
METHOD : This systematic review employed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.
RESULTS : MEDLINE, CINAHL, ERIC, MasterFILE Premier, E-Journals, Africa-Wide information and Academic Search Premier electronic databases, and non–peer-reviewed papers in Seminars in Hearing yielded a total of 63 papers. Following systematic screening using inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 12 full-text papers were included in this review. Pertinent data and findings from the review were tabulated and analyzed using a qualitative, deductive approach. Results showed that the 12 papers were published in nine peer-reviewed journals with a predominantly social scientific approach. This differs from the earlier review that reported only five papers with a predominantly philosophical approach. However, both the current and earlier studies focused on the rehabilitation/management role of the audiologist. In the earlier study, the focus was on moral judgment (as one of the components of moral behavior), whereas this was the focus of only half of the papers identified in this study, with the remaining papers focusing on moral sensitivity and moral motivation.
CONCLUSIONS : The focus of papers had evolved and continued to include more elements related to the multiple perspectives used to analyze and describe ethics research. The body of knowledge of ethics in audiology specifically expanded in the area of social scientific research, focusing on beneficence and nonmaleficence, including moral motivation and basing research on moral judgment with the emphasis on the rehabilitation/management and education/research/administration role of audiologists.
