ArticleAmerican journal of pharmaceutical education2014
Pharmacy students' interpretation of academic integrity.
Article in American journal of pharmaceutical education, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Situational judgment using ethical reasoning in Saudi undergraduate pharmacy students.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- Gender-Based Differences Among Pharmacy Students Involved in Academically Dishonest Behavior.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2018Article
- Motivations and Predictors of Cheating in Pharmacy School.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore pharmacy students' recognition and interpretation of situations constituting breaches of academic integrity.
methodsA survey instrument comprising 10 hypothetical student(s) scenarios was completed by 852 students in the bachelor of pharmacy program at an Australian university. The scenarios were relevant to current modes of assessment and presented degrees of ambiguity around academic integrity.
resultsIdentification of the hypothetical student(s) at fault, particularly in the deliberately ambiguous scenarios, was not related to the respondents' year of study or sex. Students with fewer years of postsecondary education were more definitive in their interpretation of contentious cases. Respondents from all 4 years of study reported witnessing many of these behaviors among their peers.
conclusionThis study provided novel insight into the ambiguity surrounding academic integrity and students' perceptions relating to the deliberate or inadvertent involvement of other parties.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.