ArticleCurrent medical science2019
Development and Validation of a Simplified Chinese Version of the Assessment Tool for Students' Perceptions of Medical Professionalism.
Article in Current medical science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- East Meets West: A Multisite Validity Study of the China Medical Professionalism Inventory.Perspectives on medical education · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Professionalism is crucial in all professions and is particularly important in the medical field. Measuring students' perceptions of professionalism can help to form education targeting the enhancement of professionalism. This study aimed to validate an effective assessment tool for the measurement of medical students' perceptions of medical professionalism in mainland China. The cross-sectional survey was conducted in three medical colleges in Guangdong, China. Of the 2103 eligible medical students, 1976 responded, and 1856 questionnaires were deemed valid. Students from clinical medicine in these three medical colleges were randomly selected by cluster sampling. First, a Simplified Chinese Version questionnaire to measure Student's Perception of Medical Professionalism (SCV-SPMP) was constructed. Second, questionnaires from 1856 students majoring in clinical medicine at three medical colleges were included in the analysis. Third, exploratory factor analysis, Cronbach's alpha, item-subscale correlation, and confirmatory factor analysis were conducted to test the validity and reliability of the SCV-SPMP. Nine items were eliminated following exploratory factor analysis, and four subscales were extracted from the analysis. All internal consistency reliability exceeded the minimum standard. The overall Cronbach's alpha was 0.94, and four subscales' alphas were 0.82 (Accountability and excellence), 0.81 (Duty), 0.89 (Honor and integrity), and 0.85 (Practice habits and respect for others), respectively. The model fit was good. The convergent validity and discriminant validity were acceptable. The modified SCV-SPMP was found to be a valid and reliable tool to capture the main features of Chinese students' perceptions of medical professionalism in four dimensions, and it provides a quantitative method for the measurement of the students' perceptions in mainland China..
Indexed as
Identifiers
31347007What 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.