Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30646600›Full record

ArticleMedical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2019

Professionalisation of International Medical Volunteer Work to Maintain Ethical Standards: A Qualitative Study Exploring the Experience of Volunteer Doctors in Relation to UK Policy.

Holly Eadsforth

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Holly EadsforthDepartment of Anaesthetics, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow G4 0SF, UK. holly.eadsforth@nhs.net.ORCID 0000-0002-2045-6000

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Doctors from the United Kingdom are increasingly involved in international medical volunteerism in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Although supported by government policy this practice lacks infrastructure and coordination. Volunteer activities can have positive impact but also risk causing harm. Without external governance the responsibility lies with volunteers and their organisations to self-evaluate their activities. This study aimed to explore influences affecting volunteer engagement with ethical standards and evaluative practice. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven doctors working in the Scottish National Health Service with volunteer experience in LMICs. Findings were analysed thematically to explore this issue in view of ongoing policy development. Although ethical standards were valued by participants they were unaware of relevant government policy. Influences on volunteer development are unstructured and vary in quality. Evaluation lacks structure and framing. Volunteer physicians face a number of barriers to engaging in critical evaluation of their activities in LMICs. Development and professionalization of medical volunteering in LMICs needs to address volunteer preparation and evaluative practice to maximise the benefits of volunteering, reduce the risk of harm and maximise learning and accountability. Further areas of research are suggested to inform professionalisation of this sector.

Indexed as

ethicsglobalinternationalmedicalpolicyvolunteer

Identifiers

PMID30646600
PMCPMC6359092

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.