Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32297134›Full record

ArticleScience and engineering ethics2020

Medical Students' Acquaintance with Core Concepts, Institutions and Guidelines on Good Scientific Practice: A Pre- and Post-questionnaire Survey.

Katharina Fuerholzer, Maximilian Schochow, Richard Peter, Florian Steger

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Katharina FuerholzerInstitute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Ulm University, Parkstraße 11, 89073, Ulm, Germany. katharina.fuerholzer@alumni.uni-ulm.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6586-5377
Maximilian SchochowInstitute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Ulm University, Parkstraße 11, 89073, Ulm, Germany.
Richard PeterInstitute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Ulm University, Parkstraße 11, 89073, Ulm, Germany.
Florian StegerInstitute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Ulm University, Parkstraße 11, 89073, Ulm, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

German medical students are not sufficiently introduced to the ethical principles and pitfalls of scientific work. Therefore, a compulsory course on good scientific practice (GSP) has been developed and implemented into the curriculum of medical students, with the goal to foster scientific integrity and prevent scientific misconduct. Students' knowledge and attitudes towards GSP were evaluated by a pre-post-teaching questionnaire survey (n = 239). Most participants initially had startling knowledge gaps in the field. Moreover, they were not acquainted with core institutions on GSP, the office of ombudsperson and the nationally binding guidelines on GSP. The pre-post-teaching comparison showed statistically significant improvement in all areas tested; moreover, after the course participants confided more trust in GSP institutions. Applying ethical rules into practice can be challenging; therefore, students need to learn to work independently with guidelines on GSP and should be introduced to institutions providing further guidance. As our study has shown, students are very willing to pursue a scientific career based on integrity and honesty, however, they lack the knowledge how to do so. In light of our results, we therefore recommend to integrate courses on GSP already at an early time into the mandatory curriculum of medical students.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, UndergraduateStudents, MedicalCurriculumFriendsHumansMotivationSurveys and QuestionnairesEthicsGermanyMedical educationMedicineQuestionnaireScientific integrity

Identifiers

PMID32297134
PMCPMC8354979

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.