Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38433511›Full record

ArticleCroatian medical journal2024

Exploring changes in the perception of e-professionalism among medical and dental students: a quantitative cross-sectional study.

Danko Relić, Marko Marelić, Joško Viskić, Lovela Machala Poplašen, Marjeta Majer, Kristijan Sedak, Tea Vukušić Rukavina

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Croatian medical journal, 2024. 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

7 authors.

Danko Relić
Marko MarelićMarko Marelić, Andrija Štampar School of Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Zagreb, Rockefellerova 4, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia, marko.marelic@snz.hr.
Joško Viskić
Lovela Machala Poplašen
Marjeta Majer
Kristijan Sedak
Tea Vukušić Rukavina

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo compare e-professionalism perceptions between medical and dental students, focusing on their awareness and understanding of guidelines for developing e-professionalism.

methodsA cross-sectional quantitative study was conducted at the University of Zagreb School of Medicine (UZSM) and School of Dental Medicine (UZSDM) in 2022/2023. Data were gathered through a questionnaire designed specifically for the survey.

resultsOf the 646 questionnaires collected, 626 were analyzed, with a response rate of 33.95% for UZSM and 37.83% for UZSDM. Most respondents (71.4%) were female, with a median age of 21. Medical students significantly more frequently considered it unprofessional to publish posts containing photos of patients/clients (96.5% vs 75.1%), endorsements of health products without conflict-of-interest disclosures (60.6% vs 33.0%), and posts describing patient interactions without revealing identifying information (51.7% vs 27.4%). In contrast, dental medicine students more frequently considered it unprofessional to publish posts with swearing or foul language (81.2% vs 67.4%), critical comments about lecturers (68.0% vs 46.9%), and criticisms of course material or the institution (52.3% vs 36.4%). Only 23.2% of students were aware of e-professionalism guidelines, with 37.9% of those familiar with their content.

conclusionWhile medical and dental students recognize the importance of e-professionalism, their perceptions have substantial differences. The need for promoting existing guidelines and integrating e-professionalism into curricula is evident. Continuous monitoring and research in this domain are essential to ensure future health care professionals maintain high standards of online professionalism.

Indexed as

ProfessionalismStudents, DentalCross-Sectional StudiesCurriculumFemaleHumansMalePerception

Identifiers

PMID38433511
PMCPMC10915766

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.