Authors’ awareness of concepts in the authorship of scientific publications: Viewpoints of the dental faculty in India

Punyani, Silky R.; Deshpande, Ashwini

doi:10.1016/j.jobcr.2016.05.001

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 9 publications

(8 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, nationality explained 20.3% of the positive relationship, practice area explained 18.9% of the negative relationship, current position held explained 18.7% of the positive relationship, and years of experience explained 16.1% of the negative relationship to the variation, with a statistically significant difference (p=0.001 0.001, 0.003, and 0.005, respectively), which was confirmed by Bootstrap model. The relationship was verified by the nonexistence of multi-collinearity with the current position factor with VIF of 1.536, 1.381, 1.681, and 1.397, respectively, which is less than 3 or 5 [21][22][23] (Table 9).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…[15][16][17][18] A previous study has reported the essential Awareness elements of scientific research, 19 and others have discussed ethics in research, biostatistics knowledge of healthcare professionals, and resources that can be used. 20,21 However, to the best of our knowledge, no studies are conducted to discuss pharmacists' knowledge about scientific publications. 22 Therefore, in this study, we aimed to declare the knowledge of pharmacists about scientific publications in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Knowledge of Pharmacists about Scientific Publications in Saudi Arabia

Alomi¹,

Jarallah²,

Alsaab³

et al. 2021

PTB Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: In this study, we aimed to assess pharmacists' knowledge about scientific publications in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Methods: In this cross-sectional survey, we analyzed pharmacists' knowledge about scientific publications in Saudi Arabia. We used a self-reported electronic survey questionnaire and distributed it to pharmacists from interns to consultants and specialists. The survey collected demographic information of the responders and their knowledge of selected research paper elements in a scientific journal. We used 5-point Likert response scale system with closeended questions to obtain responses. The data were collected through the Survey Monkey system and analyzed using the Statistical Package of Social Sciences (SPSS) and Jeffery's Amazing Statistics Program (JASP), and Microsoft Excel (version 16) software. Results: A total of 543 pharmacists responded to the questionnaire. Of them, more than one-quarter of the participants responded from the central region (155 (28.55%)), followed by the eastern region (133 (24.49%)), with statistically significant differences between all regions (p=0.000). Females responded more (321 (59.12%)) than that of males (222 (40.88%)). The majority of the responders were Saudi nationals (351 (64.64%)), followed by non-Saudi nationals (192 (35.36%)), with statistically significant differences between them (p=0.000). The average score for knowledge of pharmacists about writing a section in the research article was 4.07, with high scores obtained for the elements "knowledge of the abstract section" (4.51) and "knowledge of the Introduction section" (4.47), with statistically significant between all responses (p=0.000). The average score for knowledge of pharmacists about various study designs in the manuscript was 3.36, with high scores obtained for the elementary knowledge of cohort study (3.59), case series (3.59), observational study, and Letters to the editor (3.49), with statistically significant differences between responses (p=0.000). The average score for knowledge of pharmacists about journal indexing database was (3.17), with high scores obtained for the elementary knowledge of the Google Scholar (3.78), PubMed (3.60), and Index Medicus (3.43). The scores for the reliability analysis of McDonald's ω was (0.843), Cronbach's α was (0.847), Gutmann's λ2 was (0.888), Gutmann's was λ6 (0.985), and Greater Lower Bound was (0.994). Conclusion: Pharmacists' knowledge about writing research sections, study design, and journal indexing database for scientific publications in Saudi Arabia was varied. Therefore, we highly recommend improving pharmacists' training and education during graduation to improve patients' pharmaceutical care in Saudi Arabia.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge of Pharmacists about Scientific Publications in Saudi Arabia

Alomi¹,

Jarallah²,

Alsaab³

et al. 2021

PTB Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Shirazi et al (2010) identified the lack of conceptual awareness of plagiarism among Pakistani medical faculty members as well. Punyani and Deshpande (2018) found a lacuna regarding the authors' understanding of important basic concepts in scientific writing that includes the concept of plagiarism. Nushi and Firoozkohi (2017) found while assessing the role of an Iranian university TEFL (Teaching English as a Foreign Language) program teachers on imparting plagiarism understanding among their students, that only 16.4% syllabuses which they examined, included a clear plagiarism policy.…”

Section: Findings Of Data Analysis 61 Perceived Causes Of Plagiarismmentioning

confidence: 99%

An exploratory study of university librarians’ perceptions on causes and deterrents of plagiarism: a Pakistani perspective

Mansoor

Ameen

Arshad

2022

GKMC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The role of academic libraries in dissemination of information and facilitating research of academic community is well-established world over. However, a significant role of libraries in ensuring fair use of information to promote an ethical research culture at the higher education institutes is also flourishing. This study aims to explore the perceived causes of unethical use of literature by university scholars and deterrents to plagiarism in universities of Pakistan. Design/methodology/approach The design of the study was qualitative, and interviews were conducted on nine university library heads in Pakistan who were officially administrating anti-plagiarism (Turnitin) software service at their universities and were providing “similarity index certification” of PhD and MPhil research work through the software. They were purposively selected for the interviews because of their direct interaction with the researchers and faculty on matters of information searching as well as its ethical use. The study is based on PhD thesis work of the first author. Findings The findings of the study depicted that conceptual unawareness of plagiarism, lack of information skills, socio-cultural factors and weak policies were the prime reasons for unethical research practices among graduate scholars. Participants were positive that a role of university library in combating plagiarism through provision of anti-plagiarism software and guidance could prove more beneficial for both the researchers and libraries. Originality/value Multiple studies have been conducted, in and out of south Asian region, to gather the views of the students and faculty on the matters of academic misconduct. However, no study was found presenting the views of the other stakeholders in promotion of academic integrity. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is first of its kind in South Asian context and provided observation-based views of a group of university library heads who are also administrating anti-plagiarism service in their universities on the causes and deterrents to plagiarism.

show abstract