Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37380977›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2023

Knowledge and attitudes of Chinese medical postgraduates toward research ethics and research ethics committees: a cross-sectional study.

Xing Liu, Xianxiong Wang, Ying Wu, Haitao Yu, Min Yang, Kaveh Khoshnood, Esther Luo, Xiaomin Wang

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Xing LiuMedical Ethics Committee, Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, 87 Xiangya Road, Changsha, 410008, Hunan, People's Republic of China.
Xianxiong WangSchool of Humanities, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, 410012, People's Republic of China.
Ying WuSchool of Humanities, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, 410012, People's Republic of China.
Haitao YuSchool of Humanities, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, 410012, People's Republic of China.
Min YangXiangya School of Nursing, Central South University, Changsha, 410013, Hunan, People's Republic of China.
Kaveh KhoshnoodYale School of Public Health, Yale University, 60 College Street, New Haven, CT, 06520, USA.
Esther LuoYale School of Public Health, Yale University, 60 College Street, New Haven, CT, 06520, USA.
Xiaomin WangCenter for Clinical Pharmacology, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410013, Hunan, People's Republic of China. xiaominwang@csu.edu.cn.
Central South University · CNYale University · USThird Xiangya Hospital · CNXiangya Hospital Central South University · CN

Funding

Changsha Natural Science Foundation, Research on Quality Assessment of Ethics Committees in Medical and Health Institution kq2202362Scientific Research Project of Health Commission of Hunan Province B202315018734
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResearch ethics provides the ethical standards for conducting sound and safe research. The field of medical research in China is rapidly growing and facing various ethical challenges. However, in China, little empirical research has been conducted on the knowledge and attitudes of medical postgraduates toward research ethics and RECs. It is critical for medical postgraduates to develop a proper knowledge of research ethics at the beginning of their careers. The purpose of this study was to assess the knowledge and attitudes of medical postgraduates toward research ethics and RECs.

methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted from May to July 2021 at a medical school and two affiliated hospitals in south-central China. The instrument of the study was an online survey that was distributed via WeChat.

resultsWe found that only 46.7% were familiar with the ethical guidelines for research with human subjects. In addition, 63.2% of participants were familiar with the RECs that reviewed their research, and 90.7% perceived RECs as helpful. However, only 36.8% were fully aware of the functions of RECs. In the meantime, 30.7% believed that review by an REC would delay research and make it more difficult for researchers. Furthermore, most participants (94.9%) believed that a course on research ethics should be mandatory for medical postgraduates. Finally, 27.4% of the respondents considered the fabrication of some data or results to be acceptable.

conclusionThis paper serves to suggest that research ethics education should be prioritized in medical ethics curriculum, and course syllabi or teaching methods should be revised to provide medical postgraduates with a deeper understanding of the principles, regulations, and specifics of research ethics. We also recommend that RECs provide diverse approaches in their review procedure to facilitate the understanding of medical postgraduates of the functions and processes of RECs and to enhance their awareness of research integrity.

Indexed as

AttitudeEthics Committees, ResearchStudents, MedicalCross-Sectional StudiesEast Asian PeopleEthics, ResearchHumansAttitudeKnowledgeMedical postgraduatesResearch ethicsResearch ethics committees

Identifiers

PMID37380977
PMCPMC10303304
OpenAlexW4382400870

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.