ArticleSocial sciences & humanities open2026
Research mentorship in graduate programs in a developing country: An ethical perspective.
Article in Social sciences & humanities open, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Avoidance of research misconduct, authorship conflict, and adequate research training, including research ethics, is essential for high-quality research outcomes. This cross-sectional study used a questionnaire to evaluate graduate students' perceptions about the adequacy of graduate supervision in various academic institutions. The sample comprised 251 participants (64.5 % females) from public and private institutions. The majority were master's students (88.8 %) and were satisfied with their primary supervisor (70.9 %) and co-supervisor (50.5 %). Most of the students were satisfied with the different aspects of supervision. However, some of the students were unsatisfied with guidance on data/statistical analyses (25.9 %), potential ethical issues (27.7 %), and supervision for thesis/manuscript writing (29.5 %). Authorship order was discussed in the early stages of research in only 31.1 % of instances. In addition, 59.4 % of students were satisfied with their author order placement. Gender differences in satisfaction with guidance on manuscript writing and potential ethical issues have been reported. In addition, students who had prior research experience were significantly more likely to report greater satisfaction with research proposal writing supervision. In conclusion, moderately acceptable satisfaction with the supervision of graduate students was reported. The students' supervision process can be further enhanced by having clear supervision regulations and training faculty members. Dissatisfaction with thesis writing and data and statistical analysis requires better guidelines for supervision and training for graduate students and their supervisors.
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.