Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30092805›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2018

Investigating the existence of social networks in cheating behaviors in medical students.

Jorge Monteiro, Fernanda Silva-Pereira, Milton Severo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Jorge MonteiroDepartamento de Ciências da Saúde Pública e Forenses e Educação Médica, Unidade de Educação Médica, Piso 6, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade do Porto, Al. Prof. Hernâni Monteiro, 4200-319, Porto, Portugal.
Fernanda Silva-PereiraDepartamento de Ciências da Saúde Pública e Forenses e Educação Médica, Unidade de Educação Médica, Piso 6, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade do Porto, Al. Prof. Hernâni Monteiro, 4200-319, Porto, Portugal.
Milton SeveroDepartamento de Ciências da Saúde Pública e Forenses e Educação Médica, Unidade de Educação Médica, Piso 6, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade do Porto, Al. Prof. Hernâni Monteiro, 4200-319, Porto, Portugal. milton@med.up.pt.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5787-4871
Universidade do Porto · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMost studies on academic cheating rely on self-reported questionnaires and focus on the individual, overlooking cheating as a group activity. The aim of this study is to estimate the true prevalence of cheating/anomalies among medical students using a statistical index developed for this purpose, and to explore the existence of social networks between anomalies in students' results.

methodsAngoff's A index was applied to a sample of 30 written examinations, with a total of 1487 students and 7403 examinations taken, from the 2014/2015 academic year of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Porto to detect anomaly pairs. All analyses are within the same academic year and not across years. Through simulations, the sensitivity and specificity of the statistical method was determined, and the true prevalence of anomalies/cheating was estimated. Networks of anomaly pairs were created to search for patterns and to calculate their density.

resultsThe percentage of students who cheated at least once increased with the year of medical school, being lowest in the first year (3.4%) and highest in the fifth (17.3%). The year of medical school was associated with anomalies (p < 0.05). The network's density was also lowest in the first year (1.12E-04) and highest in the fifth (8.20E-04). The true prevalence of anomalies was estimated to be 1.85% (95%CI: 1.07-3.20%).

conclusionsThese findings suggest that some students are involved in social networks of cheating, which grow over time, resulting in an increase of anomalies/cheating in later academic years.

Indexed as

DeceptionEducational MeasurementSocial SupportHumansSchools, MedicalSelf ReportStudents, MedicalSurveys and QuestionnairesTime FactorsAcademic dishonestyAssessmentCheatingSocial networkUndergraduate

Identifiers

PMID30092805
PMCPMC6085665
OpenAlexW2887554296

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.