Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28616839›Full record

ArticleScience and engineering ethics2018

Continuous Evaluation in Ethics Education: A Case Study.

Tristan McIntosh, Cory Higgs, Michael Mumford, Shane Connelly, James DuBois

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Tristan McIntoshDepartment of Psychology, Center for Applied Social Research, The University of Oklahoma, 201 Stephenson Parkway, Suite 4100, Norman, OK, 73019, USA. tristan.mcintosh@ou.edu.
Cory HiggsDepartment of Psychology, Center for Applied Social Research, The University of Oklahoma, 201 Stephenson Parkway, Suite 4100, Norman, OK, 73019, USA.
Michael MumfordDepartment of Psychology, Center for Applied Social Research, The University of Oklahoma, 201 Stephenson Parkway, Suite 4100, Norman, OK, 73019, USA.
Shane ConnellyDepartment of Psychology, Center for Applied Social Research, The University of Oklahoma, 201 Stephenson Parkway, Suite 4100, Norman, OK, 73019, USA.
James DuBoisWashington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, 4523 Clayton Ave., CB 8005, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A great need for systematic evaluation of ethics training programs exists. Those tasked with developing an ethics training program may be quick to dismiss the value of training evaluation in continuous process improvement. In the present effort, we use a case study approach to delineate how to leverage formative and summative evaluation measures to create a high-quality ethics education program. With regard to formative evaluation, information bearing on trainee reactions, qualitative data from the comments of trainees, in addition to empirical findings, can ensure that the training program operates smoothly. Regarding summative evaluation, measures examining trainee cognition, behavior, and organization-level results provide information about how much trainees have changed as a result of taking the ethics training. The implications of effective training program evaluation are discussed.

Indexed as

CurriculumEvaluation Studies as TopicProgram EvaluationEthics, ResearchHumansEthical decision makingEthics trainingEvaluationProcess improvement

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.