ArticleJournal of healthcare leadership2024
Professionalism and Self-Evaluation: Diverging Perspectives Among Physicians and Nurses.
Article in Journal of healthcare leadership, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Training needs and curricular priorities for managing multimorbidity in Spanish primary care: findings from a national exploratory online survey.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- An artificial intelligence application framework for nursing education: a scoping review based on the KAS model.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Exploring the relationship between spiritual health and professionalism in Iranian operating room interns.Discover mental health · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Professionalism among healthcare professionals is often defined in terms such as altruism, humanism, and excellence. The integration of such professionalism ideals to healthcare professionals' practice poses a challenge to medical tutors. We examined the assessment of professionalism among physicians and nurses by their peers and evaluated the significance of each professional role component within each sector. We also performed a cross-sector assessment whereby physicians assessed nurses' professionalism and vice versa. Methods: A survey among physicians, interns, and nurses. The participants were asked to rate the extent that each of the 12 characteristics contributes to physicians' and nurses' professionalism of on a scale of 1 (does not contribute at all) to 10 (highly contributes). Each participant rated the contribution of each component to the professionalism of their own occupation (direct scoring) and to the professionalism of the other occupation (cross scoring). Results: In total, 300 healthcare professionals (mean age 36.6, 46% males) responded to the survey. The most highly contributing characteristics to physicians' professionalism were knowledge, responsibility, decision-making and leadership, clustered as "strategic judgment". The most highly contributing characteristics to nurses' professionalism were responsibility, personal attention, empathy, and skills, clustered as "bedside approach" and "performance abilities". Cross-assessment among professionals was different: Nurses assigned higher ratings in general, interns assigned higher ratings to physicians' characteristics, whereas physicians assigned lower ratings to professionalism characteristics, and especially to those of nurses. Nurses emphasized patient centeredness and communication skills more than physicians. Nurses and interns appreciated teamwork compared to physicians. Major differences in how physicians and nurses perceive professionalism revealed physicians' emphasis on "strategic judgment" while nurses emphasis on "bedside approach". Conclusion: Physicians and nurses hold differing viewpoints on many topics, including the objectives of their mission, expected performance, and activity types. Medical professionals can assess their colleagues and partners, recognizing both strengths and weaknesses in themselves and others.
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.