ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2021
Development and validation of a questionnaire for professionalism in cyber users in medical sciences in Iran.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Assessment instruments for e-professionalism in healthcare: a systematic review.BMC medical education · 2026Pooled it
- Development and validation of self-assessment instrument to measure the digital professionalism of healthcare professionals using social media.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Online instructor satisfaction measure: Psychometric properties of the Persian version in nursing-midwifery faculty members.Journal of education and health promotion · 2024Article
- Comparing the Familiarity of the Basic and Clinical Faculty Members of Iran University of Medical Sciences with the Principles of Digital Professionalism.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConsidering the importance of virtual professionalism and professional ethics in medical sciences, and the necessity to pay attention to this issue and its impact on medical professionalism, this study aimed to build a professional culture questionnaire in a virtual environment for students of medical sciences in Iran. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis is an exploratory, sequential, mixed-methods research which was conducted in three sections. In the first section, the concept of e-professionalism in medical sciences was analyzed using the hybrid concept analysis in the theoretical work, field work, and final analysis stages in order to extract information related to the concept. In the second section, an item of the questionnaire was designed based on the concept, reviewed texts, and related questionnaires, in the third section, psychometric properties of a questionnaires were evaluated.
resultsTotally, 39 items were included in the initial pool, which reduced to 33 items in the final questionnaire after reviewing the psychometric properties. Factor analyses led to extraction of five factors including appraisal of e-professionalism compliance with the laws and regulations governing cyberspace, individual professionalism, knowledge management, respect for professionalism in interpersonal and group rules, and complying with ethics in the use of cyberspace. The internal consistency of questionnaire was also confirmed by Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.78, also all factor correlations absed stability were significant (
conclusionAn exploratory sequential study in this study led to the extraction of five factors and development of a 33-item questionnaire in e-professionalism. As results and analysis of the psychometric properties and validation of each item, this questionnaire is valid and reliable for the assessment of levels of e-professionalism in medical sciences in Iran.
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.