ArticleBMC medical education2019
Biomedical research ethics in Cameroon: a survey to assess training needs of medical residents and students.
Article in BMC medical education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Experiences of researchers in navigating applied research in the MENA region: an exploratory online cross-sectional survey.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Behind the scenes of research ethics committee oversight: a qualitative research study with committee chairs in the Middle East and North Africa region.BMC medical ethics · 2024Article
- Perspectives of Resident and Attending Ophthalmologists on Common Ethical Dilemmas in Research.Journal of academic ophthalmology (2017) · 2023Article
- Training needs of health researchers in research ethics in Cameroon: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTraining curricula in research ethics for potential and future researchers should be implemented and constantly updated. This requires data regarding training needs.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey on residents, fifth and sixth-year medical students registered in the 2006-2007 academic year at the Faculty of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences (FMBS) of the University of Yaounde 1, Cameroon.
resultsTwo-fifths (40.4%) of respondents (response rate 70.9%) reported training in research ethics. Less than half were aware of specific regulatory texts relevant to research ethics. Among those who reported conducting a research project 66.7% declared having obtained informed consent from participants and 32.9% having submitted their protocol to an Ethics Review Committee. Participants identified training priorities in research ethics and responsibilities of key actors in the protection of research participants.
conclusionThere is a need to improve the training and attitude of medical students and residents in order to prepare them to respect and protect research participants.
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.