Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32429926›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2020

Medical professionalism in ophthalmology: design and testing of a scenario based survey.

Eman Alkahtani, Abdullah Assiri, Saba Alrashaed, Mosa Alharbi, Saeed Almotowa, Rajiv Khandekar, Deepak P Edward

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Eman AlkahtaniThe Eye Consultant Clinic, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. ekahtanii@gmail.com.
Abdullah AssiriKing Khaled Eye Specialist Hospital, P.O. Box 7191, Riyadh, 11462, Saudi Arabia.
Saba AlrashaedKing Khaled Eye Specialist Hospital, P.O. Box 7191, Riyadh, 11462, Saudi Arabia.
Mosa AlharbiKing Khaled Eye Specialist Hospital, P.O. Box 7191, Riyadh, 11462, Saudi Arabia.
Saeed AlmotowaKing Khaled Eye Specialist Hospital, P.O. Box 7191, Riyadh, 11462, Saudi Arabia.
Rajiv KhandekarKing Khaled Eye Specialist Hospital, P.O. Box 7191, Riyadh, 11462, Saudi Arabia.
Deepak P EdwardKing Khaled Eye Specialist Hospital, P.O. Box 7191, Riyadh, 11462, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProfessionalism is hard to quantify but essential in medical practice. We present a survey tool for ophthalmologists that assessed professionalism using case-based scenarios in central Saudi Arabia.

methodsOphthalmologists (resident, fellows and consultants) participated in a web-based survey in 2015. Out of 44 attributes related to professionalism, experts selected 32 attributes with validity indices of ≥0.80. To evaluate these attributes, 51 scenario-based questions were developed and included in the survey. For each attribute, participants were given choices of close ended responses: unacceptable (1), probably unacceptable (2), acceptable (3), probably acceptable (4). The attribute score was compared to the gold standard (responses of an expert group). An attribute score was generated and compared among subgroups.

resultsOf the 155 ophthalmologists, responses of 147 ophthalmologists who completed more than 50% of questions were reviewed. Their mean attribute score was 84.1 ± 10.1 (Median 87.1; 25% quartile 78.1; minimum 50; and maximum 100). The variation in attribute score among consultants, fellows and resident ophthalmologists was significant (P = 0.008). The variation of attribute score by groups of attributes was also significant (P < 0.05). The score for 'Personal characteristics' was on a lower scale compared to that of other attribute groups. The variation in the scores for attribute groups; 'Personal characteristics attribute' group (p < 0.01) and 'Workplace practices & relationship' group (P = 0.03) for consultants, fellows and residents were significant.

conclusionsProfessionalism among ophthalmologists and those in training was high and influenced by years of experience. The survey tool appeared to show differences in responses to specific professional attribute groups between trainees and consultants. Additional studies with a larger sample size might be helpful in validating the survey as a tool to be used to assess professionalism in graduate medical education in ophthalmology.

Indexed as

Internship and ResidencyOphthalmologistsProfessional CompetenceProfessionalismHumansSaudi ArabiaSurveys and QuestionnairesEthicsMedical professionOphthalmologyProfessionalism

Identifiers

PMID32429926
PMCPMC7236953

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.