SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2024
Bioethical knowledge in students and health professionals: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge and practice of healthcare ethics among doctors and nurses in two Ghanaian hospitals: a comparative cross-sectional study.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Self-perceived moral competence among healthcare students in Slovakia: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Breaking the silence: confidence and barriers in raising concerns among undergraduate dental students- "a national study".BMC medical education · 2025Article
- The application of integrating medical humanities education into emergency skill-training scenario simulation teaching.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Integrating large language models into medical undergraduate laboratory course to enhance bioethical competence: a quasi-experimental study.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Bioethics training is essential for healthcare professionals as it enables them to address ethical dilemmas in their clinical practice. However, there is still a lack of rigorous teaching programs, and assessing bioethical knowledge poses challenges. Methodology: Systematic review using the PRISMA method. Results: Analysis of 27 studies reveals a lack of ethical knowledge and skills among healthcare professionals and students. Specific training in bioethics is effective in developing bioethical competencies. Different approaches have been employed, including integrated training in academic curricula and intensive or ongoing programs. The results demonstrate improvements in knowledge, attitudes, and ethical values, although regularly updating these courses is recommended. Conclusion: Specific training, institutional support, and considering regional and disciplinary differences are necessary to enhance ethics in the practice of healthcare professionals. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023437146, identifier CRD42023437146.
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.