ArticleHealth SA = SA Gesondheid2025
Ethical transgressions among healthcare professionals in South Africa from 2014 to 2023.
Article in Health SA = SA Gesondheid, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Social media use for healthcare professionals in South Africa: The do's and don'ts.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients have become more comfortable lodging complaints with professional regulatory bodies over the last several years, likely influenced by the trending nature of patient-centred care and consumerism in healthcare and increased access to information through social media. Aim: To analyse the frequency and nature of reported ethical transgressions and penalties among registered South African healthcare professionals from 2014 to 2023. Setting: The study took place in South Africa. Methods: A list of all sanctioned cases was obtained from the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) (data were unavailable for 2019). A mixed-methods approach of quantitative and qualitative content analyses was followed. Results: The study analysed 1012 ethical transgressions among 452 registered medical practitioners, physiotherapists, psychologists, dietitians, dentists and occupational therapists. Fraudulent conduct accounted for the largest number ( Conclusion: Fraudulent conduct remains the highest reported ethical transgression among registered healthcare professionals in South Africa. Individualised education that remediates deficiencies in ethical behaviours through analysis and reflection could be beneficial in mitigating ethical misconduct among healthcare professionals. Contribution: This study provides a comparative analysis of ethical transgressions and penalties among healthcare professionals in South Africa. It also offers insights into necessary areas of improvement of education and training and suggests a different approach to disciplinary action.
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.