Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25398388›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2014

Curricular priorities for business ethics in medical practice and research: recommendations from Delphi consensus panels.

James M DuBois, Elena M Kraus, Kamal Gursahani, Anthony Mikulec, Erin Bakanas

Abstract readComparative StudyConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

James M DuBoisCenter for Clinical Research Ethics, Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 S, Euclid Ave,, Saint Louis, MO 63110, USA. jdubois@wustl.edu.
Elena M Kraus
Kamal Gursahani
Anthony Mikulec
Erin Bakanas

Funding

Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational SciencesUL1TR000448 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI EVANOFF, BRADLEY A · 2012 to 2016
$41.4M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000448
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNo published curricula in the area of medical business ethics exist. This is surprising given that physicians wrestle daily with business decisions and that professional associations, the Institute of Medicine, Health and Human Services, Congress, and industry have issued related guidelines over the past 5 years. To fill this gap, the authors aimed (1) to identify the full range of medical business ethics topics that experts consider important to teach, and (2) to establish curricular priorities through expert consensus.

methodsIn spring 2012, the authors conducted an online Delphi survey with two heterogeneous panels of experts recruited in the United States. One panel focused on business ethics in medical practice (n = 14), and 1 focused on business ethics in medical research (n = 12).

resultsPanel 1 generated an initial list of 14 major topics related to business ethics in medical practice, and subsequently rated 6 topics as very important or essential to teach. Panel 2 generated an initial list of 10 major topics related to business ethics in medical research, and subsequently rated 5 as very important or essential. In both domains, the panel strongly recommended addressing problems that conflicts of interest can cause, legal guidelines, and the goals or ideals of the profession.

conclusionsThe Bander Center for Medical Business Ethics at Saint Louis University will use the results of the Delphi panel to develop online curricular resources for each of the highest rated topics.

Indexed as

CurriculumBiomedical ResearchClinical MedicineDelphi TechniqueEducational MeasurementEthics, BusinessFemaleHumansMalePractice Management, MedicalPractice Patterns, Physicians'United States

Identifiers

PMID25398388
PMCPMC4289297

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.