ArticleBMC medical education2023
Knowledge of and attitudes towards medical research ethics among first year doctoral students in Slovenia at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A worldwide itinerary of research ethics in science for a better social responsibility and justice: a bibliometric analysis and review.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2025Pooled it
- Bioethics training needs assessment for HIV research in vulnerable populations: a survey of trainees at college of health sciences, Makerere university.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Current status and factors influencing research ethics knowledge and attitudes among pediatricians: a cross-sectional survey.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResearch ethics and attitudes should be the main concern of those who are conducting and publishing research in medicine.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted using a questionnaire among first year postgraduate doctoral students in Biomedicine at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana during the academic year 2022/2023.
resultsThere were 54 out of 57 doctoral students included in the study, with a mean age (SD) of 29.7 (4.7) years, with predominantly female doctoral students, 66.7%. The number of correct answers out of 39 considered to illustrate students' knowledge of medical research ethics was 31, meaning that they gave correct answers to 80% of all the questions. The mean number (SD) of correct answers was 18.9 (5.8), which significantly differed from 31 (p < 0.001). The previous experience of the doctoral students in research was significantly correlated with their knowledge of medical research ethics, even when controlling for the age, gender and workplace of respondents.
conclusionThis study clearly showed that insufficient knowledge and a poor level of attitudes exist about the main questions pertaining to medical research ethics. Overall knowledge is well below the expected positive answers. Further studies are needed to compare the knowledge of doctoral students with that of their tutors and what implications this might have for further teaching of research ethics.
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.