Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35871067›Full record

ArticleBDJ open2022

Professionalism in dentistry: deconstructing common terminology.

Andrew Trathen, Sasha Scambler, Jennifer E Gallagher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BDJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Andrew TrathenFaculty of Dentistry, Oral & Craniofacial Sciences, Centre for Host Microbiome Interactions, King's College London, London, UK. andrew.3.trathen@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1853-2534
Sasha ScamblerFaculty of Dentistry, Oral & Craniofacial Sciences, Centre for Host Microbiome Interactions, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7232-3277
Jennifer E GallagherFaculty of Dentistry, Oral & Craniofacial Sciences, Centre for Host Microbiome Interactions, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5068-8008

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a social expectation that dentists demonstrate professionalism. Although the General Dental Council puts it at the heart of their regulatory agenda, there is not yet consensus on the meaning and implications of the term.

objectiveTo explore practising dentists' understanding of the character traits commonly associated with professionalism and what these mean in practice.

methodConstructivist grounded theory was employed throughout this study. Qualitative, in-depth interviews were conducted with dental professionals in England recruited through theoretical sampling to saturation point. Interviews used a topic guide informed by the literature, and analysis was conducted through constant comparison during data collection.

resultsThe study found that traits commonly associated with professionalism in the literature were difficult for dentists to define clearly or operationalise in a clinical setting. There was disagreement over how some traits should be understood, and it was unclear to participants how, or indeed if, the listed traits were directly relevant to practice in their current form.

conclusionRather than expecting unconditional adherence to an externally imposed definition, further exploration is required to understand how health professionals make sense of professionalism by reference to their lived experiences and worldviews. IN BRIEF: Institutional expectations of professionalism, defined through character traits and behaviours, do not appear to map neatly on to the experiences of dental professionals. Straightforward, apparently uncontroversial terms elicited a wide range of responses, including disagreement. This brought in to question whether achieving consensus is possible. Analysing how our respondents understood the terms by reference to the meanings they constructed from lived experience offers deeper insights.

Identifiers

PMID35871067
PMCPMC9308814

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.