Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34457515›Full record

ArticleMedical science educator2019

Describing the Attributional Nature of Academic Dishonesty.

Marcus A Henning, Yan Chen, Sanya Ram, Phillipa Malpas

Abstract readEditorial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medical science educator, 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

4 authors.

Marcus A HenningCentre for Medical and Health Sciences Education, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, 1142 New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-1135-3464
Yan ChenCentre for Medical and Health Sciences Education, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, 1142 New Zealand.
Sanya RamSchool of Pharmacy, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, 1142 New Zealand.
Phillipa MalpasDepartment of Psychological Medicine, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, 1142 New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is strong evidence that dishonesty occurs amongst medical students, and other allied health students and growing evidence that it occurs amongst medical academics. We believe that accidental dishonesty (or not knowing about the rules of regulations governing academic integrity) is a common attribution describing engagement in dishonesty; however, we believe that dishonest action is more often influenced and determined according to circumstance. In this paper, we aim to work through the literature that frames dishonest action with a focus on medical education, research and publication. We argue that the implications for medical education are far reaching and the root causes of many instances of dishonesty need to be more fully understood so that comprehensive, case-by-case ameliorative strategies can be developed.

Indexed as

Academic integrityAttributional nature of academic dishonestyMedical educationProfessional conduct

Identifiers

PMID34457515
PMCPMC8368338

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.