ArticleBMC medical ethics2026
Perception of e-professionalism of doctors of medicine and doctors of dental medicine among the general population in Croatia.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealth care professionals’ (HCP) behaviour on social media (SM) can affect the perception that their colleagues, patients, and the general population have about them and their professionalism. There has been extensive research on the perception of HCPs’ e-professionalism within the student HCPs population and the practising HCPs, however, the research on perceptions of the general population has been missing so far. This study had three distinct aims: (1) to examine the perception of medical doctors (MDs) and doctors of dental medicine (DMDs) e-professionalism among the general population in Croatia using the e-Professionalism Assessment Compatibility Index (ePACI) index, (2) to investigate tendencies and differences regarding values of ePACI index among the general population in Croatia, (3) to determine which sociodemographic characteristics are predictors of the ePACI index results among the general population.
methodsThe research is conducted on a probabilistic representative sample of the Croatian general population. To evaluate the perception of MDs’ and DMDs’ e-professionalism among the general population in Croatia, the ePACI index was used. Principal component analysis was used to check the dimensionality of the items in the ePACI instrument. To test multivariate relationships, a hierarchical regression analysis was used.
resultsA total of 1,000 responses were collected, of which 788 participants entered the analysis. Results showed general population in Croatia holds a “conservative” perception of the professionalism of doctors’ posts on SM (t787=28.022, p < 0.001). Hierarchical regression analysis revealed that age is the only significant predictor of the ePACI index for the general population (β = 0.131, t = 2.755, p = 0.006), with older individuals demonstrating a more “conservative” perception of the doctors’ posts on SM.
conclusionsThe general population in Croatia holds a strict or “conservative” perception of doctors’ e-professionalism. This suggests that a significant number of posts on the MDs’ and DMDs’ profiles might be perceived as unprofessional. Given that the general population is more inclined to perceive posts as unprofessional compared to MDs and DMDs themselves, there is a need for continuous and focused education for doctors to maintain their e-professionalism that also includes the perception of the general population.
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.