- Project status
- Cian O'Donovan
- Institution web page
- Host institution
- University of Oxford
- Team members
- University of Oxford: Professors Dominic Wilkinson and Julian Savulescu; University of Bristol:Professor John Coggon; University of Edinburgh: Dr Sarah Chanand Professor Sarah Cunningham-Burley; University College London: Dr Melanie Smallman and Professor James Wilson and Dr. Cian O'Donovan Nuffield Council on Bioethics: Hugh Whittal
- Funding information (if funded)
- UKRI grant number: AH/V013947/1.
- Project Summary
The UK Pandemic Ethics Accelerator harnesses and mobilises the UK’s internationally renowned expertise in ethics research. Four major UK universities and the Nuffield Council on Bioethics form the collaborative which has received £1.4M funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) as part of the UK Research and Innovation rapid response to covid.
The Accelerator provides rapid evidence, guidance, and critical analysis to inform policy and help improve decision–making. It also supports, informs and promotes public debate around key ethical challenges, and ensures that ethical thinking is embedded at the core of future pandemic preparedness.
The Accelerator covers a variety of policy domains, and has recently authored several outputs relating to social care.
- Outputs / Expected Outputs
- Response to the Joint Science and Technology and Health Select Committee inquiry: Coronavirus: Lessons learnt
- Rapid ethics review: Making older people visible: solving the denominator problem in care home data
- Social care data evidence tracker
- Response to the Department of Health and Social Care consultation on mandatory vaccination in care homes
- Project website
- Making older people visible: solving the denominator problem in care home data
- In the UK today, the government does not understand who is in care homes, where they are and for what duration of time. Critical details about the population of people in care homes is missing or is not accurate. The aim of this Rapid Ethics Review is to: 1. Highlight state-of-the-art research on the reasons for these problems in care home data. 2. Show how ethical arguments are critical in helping decision-makers understand the values and issuesat play in designing better data infrastructures, andthe urgency with which these infrastructures must berolled out. Paying attention to these concerns and underlying values will help decision-makers responsible and accountable for care homes plot a route forward.
- United Kingdom
- Care setting
- Care homes/LTC facilities
- Funding type
- Intervention types
- Document analysis | Literature reviews and synthesis
- Care partners of people living in LTCF | Care provider/care organisations | Older people | People living in care homes | People using care in the community | Staff working in long-term care | Unpaid carers