Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38500167›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2024

Understanding, being, and doing of bioethics; a state-level cross-sectional study of knowledge, attitude, and practice among healthcare professionals.

Poovishnu Devi Thangavelu, Balamurugan Janakiraman, Renuka Pawar, Pravin H Shingare, Suresh Bhosale, Russel D Souza, Ivone Duarte, Rui Nunes

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. 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 3 countries.

Poovishnu Devi ThangaveluCenter of Bioethics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal. vishnudevi25research@gmail.com.
Balamurugan JanakiramanSRM College of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, SRM Institute of Science and Technology (SRMIST), Kattankulathur, Tamil Nadu, 603203, India.
Renuka PawarInternational Chair in Bioethics, Krishna Vishwa Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University), Karad, Maharashtra, 415539, India.
Pravin H ShingarePro Chancellor, Krishna Vishwa Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University), Karad, Maharashtra, 415539, India.
Suresh BhosaleKrishna Vishwa Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University), Karad, Maharashtra, 415539, India.
Russel D SouzaInternational Institute of Organizational Psychological Medicine, Melbourne, Australia.
Ivone DuarteCenter of Bioethics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Rui NunesCenter of Bioethics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Universidade do Porto · PTDecision Sciences (United States) · USKrishna Institute of Medical Sciences · INSRM Institute of Science and Technology · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe field of bioethics examines the moral and ethical dilemmas that arise in the biological sciences, healthcare, and medical practices. There has been a rise in medical negligence cases, complaints against healthcare workers, and public dissatisfaction with healthcare professionals, according to reports from the Indian Medical Council and other healthcare associations. We intend to assess the level of knowledge, attitude, and practice of bioethics among the registered healthcare professionals (HCPs) of Maharashtra, India.

methodsA State-level online survey was conducted among the registered HCPs (n = 2143) casing all five regions of the Maharashtra state using a pre-tested self-administered questionnaire. The responses were expressed as mean, and proportions with their standard deviation and 95% CI respectively. Binary logistic regression and a multivariate logistic model were used to determine factors associated with knowledge, attitude, and practice of bioethics.

resultsOf the 2143 registered HCPs in Maharashtra included in this study, most of them (65.2%) had adequate knowledge of bioethics. Adequate knowledge was associated with lower age, profession (nurses and dentists), employment in the private sector, HCPS at Marathwada and Pune, and higher educational attainment. About 3 in 5 HCPs (59.4%) had a favorable attitude towards the ethical practice of bioethics, and was associated with profession, place of work, region of practice, and work experience. The distribution of unethical bioethics practices among 10 items was proportionally high, and only 34.4% reported good/fair practice. The common unethical practices in the state were allowing patients to be examined by interns, and not informing them about professional misconduct to the regulatory bodies.

conclusionMost HCPs had adequate knowledge of bioethics, which is encouraging and would favor the laying foundation for forming a good bioethics framework. Only 3/5 HCPs demonstrated a favorable attitude, and the observed unethical practice is alarmingly common. A serious consideration to evaluate the compliance level of bioethics practice periodically and measures to educate, sensitize, and train bioethics among HCPs in Maharashtra is warranted.

Indexed as

BioethicsHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeCross-Sectional StudiesHealth PersonnelHumansIndiaAttitudeBioethicsHealthcare professionalsIndiaKnowledgeMaharashtraPractice

Identifiers

PMID38500167
PMCPMC10949768
OpenAlexW4392907799

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.