Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37893792›Full record

ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Awareness of Medical Professionals Regarding Research Ethics in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: A Survey to Assess Training Needs.

Ghiath Alahmad, Khalid Malawi Alshahrani, Renad Abdulaziz Alduhaim, Rawan Alhelal, Rawa M Faden, Naila A Shaheen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Ghiath AlahmadKing Abdullah International Medical Research Center (KAIMRC), King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh 11481, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-3331-4378
Khalid Malawi AlshahraniKing Abdullah International Medical Research Center (KAIMRC), King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh 11481, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0009-0008-0095-1937
Renad Abdulaziz AlduhaimCollege of Medicine, Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University, Riyadh 11432, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0009-0003-3417-6194
Rawan AlhelalKing Abdullah International Medical Research Center (KAIMRC), King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh 11481, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0009-0002-2657-7433
Rawa M FadenKing Abdullah International Medical Research Center (KAIMRC), King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh 11481, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-9051-8705
Naila A ShaheenKing Abdullah International Medical Research Center (KAIMRC), King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh 11481, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEthics is an essential component of human research, and knowledge and awareness of ethical guidelines are required to conduct research involving human subjects and ensure the participants' safety.

objectivesTo investigate medical professionals' and researchers' knowledge of national and international research ethics guidelines, key principles in human research projects, ethical issues in different types of research, the importance of informed consent, and institutional review boards. MATERIALS AND

methodsA cross-sectional study with 251 participants, including physicians, nurses, and researchers from three different research centers and hospitals in Riyadh city, was carried out using an electronic self-structured questionnaire. The sample size was estimated using OpenEpi, Version 3. The questionnaire contained six different sets of questions to analyze knowledge about research ethics and guidelines. The results were analyzed using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA).

resultsAbout 53.78% of the participants had received research ethics education, out of which 78.51% of the participants expressed the need for more training in research ethics education. The Belmont Report showed a high level of unawareness among nurses (88.3%), physicians (73.8%), and researchers (55.32%). Nurses had a high level of positive attitude about all the key principles of human research. The highest level of awareness of ethical issues in clinical trials and interventional studies was found among researchers (54%), and the lowest level of awareness was exhibited by nurses (19.32%). Nurses (74.34%) and physicians (62.79%) had the lowest positive attitudes about obtaining children's assent in pediatric research. Physicians and researchers had a higher awareness of the IRB than nurses.

conclusionResearchers were well-versed in research ethics, regulatory guidelines, and ethical issues in various types of research, whereas nurses were enthusiastic about key principles in human research and the importance of informed consent. This study shows that a very low percentage of nurses have received research ethics education and emphasizes the critical importance of including research ethics education in nursing curricula, as the involvement of nurses in research is inevitable. This study also shows the lack of knowledge among nurses, researchers, and doctors about various international guidelines. It emphasizes the importance of adding regulatory guidelines to the curriculum and teaching them effectively to students. Also, periodic workshops should be conducted to enhance the practical knowledge of the professionals regarding the guidelines and guide them in overcoming the practical difficulties they encounter during their practice.

Indexed as

awarenessethicsinformed consentresearch

Identifiers

PMID37893792
PMCPMC10606152

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.