Knowledge of scientific misconduct in publication among medical students

Mubeen, Syed Muhammad; Qurrat-ul-Ain, Qurrat-ul-Ain; Ghayas, Rabia; Rizvi, Syed Hasan Adil; Khan, Shaukat Ali

doi:10.4103/efh.efh_221_16

Cited by 12 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study demonstrates that the majority of students and faculty members in Pakistan do not receive formal training in research and scientific writing misconduct, including plagiarism. This is consistent with a recent report that showed a lack of knowledge of scientific misconduct among medical students from public and private medical colleges in Karachi [ 11 ]. In addition, participants in these workshops generally lacked the skills and expertise to detect and avoid scientific misconduct or plagiarism.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Combating Scientific Misconduct: The Role of Focused Workshops in Changing Attitudes Towards Plagiarism

Rathore¹,

Fatima

Farooq

et al. 2018

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionScientific misconduct is a global issue. There is low awareness among health professionals regarding plagiarism, particularly in developing countries, including Pakistan. There is no formal training in the ethical conduct of research or writing for under- and post-graduate students in the majority of medical schools in Pakistan. Internet access to published literature has made plagiarism easy. The aim of this study was to document the effectiveness of focused workshops on reducing scientific misconduct as measured using a modified version of the attitude towards plagiarism questionnaire (ATPQ) assessment tool.Materials and methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted with participants of workshops on scientific misconduct. Demographic data were recorded. A modified ATPQ was used as a pre- and post-test for workshop participants. Data were entered in SPSS v20 (IBM< Armonk, NY, US). Frequencies and descriptive statistics were analyzed. An independent sample t-test was run to analyze differences in mean scores on pre-workshop ATPQ and differences in mean scores on post-test scores.ResultsThere were 38 males and 42 females (mean age: 26.2 years) who participated in the workshops and completed the pre- and post-assessments. Most (59; 73.75%) were final-year medical students. One-third (33.8%) of the respondents had neither attended workshops related to ethics in medical research nor published manuscripts in medical journals (32.5%). More than half (55%) admitted witnessing unethical practices in research. There was a significant improvement in attitudes toward plagiarism after attending the workshop (mean difference = 7.18 (6.2), t = 10.32, P < .001).ConclusionsFocused workshops on how to detect and avoid scientific misconduct can help increase knowledge and improve attitudes towards plagiarism, as assessed by the modified ATPQ. Students, residents, and faculty members must be trained to conduct ethical medical research and avoid all forms of scientific misconduct.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Combating Scientific Misconduct: The Role of Focused Workshops in Changing Attitudes Towards Plagiarism

Rathore¹,

Fatima

Farooq

et al. 2018

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This was comparable to a study by Mubeen et al in four medical colleges of Karachi. In that study, deficiencies in knowledge regarding several aspects of publication ethics were shown among medical students of both public and private medical colleges where poor knowledge about fabrication of data and scientific misconduct in publications was reported [6]. These findings emphasize the increasing importance of raising awareness and the training of research and publication ethics among undergraduate students during their academic years.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

“…The final questionnaire is composed of three parts as follows: Part I was about demographics and general information, including gender, year of study, nationality, previous participation in clinical research, and if the participants had received ethics training previously. Part II was about the student's knowledge and awareness of terminologies of research misconduct, where the participants' awareness and knowledge of certain terminologies and definitions related to scientific research conduct/misconduct in clinical research were assessed [5,6]. Responses to knowledge questions were framed as a 3-point Scale (aware (I know), not aware (do not know), and not sure).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Pharmacy Students’ Knowledge and Perception of Scientific Integrity

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientific integrity, proper research conduct and avoiding research misconduct including plagiarism, fabrication and falsification, are all essential to all disciplines. Since research experience is a recommended skill to gain during undergraduate education, undergraduate students need to be aware of research misconduct in order to avoid it. This study was carried out to determine the level of knowledge and awareness regarding research misconduct, and the independent factors that might contribute to attitudes towards research misconduct. In this cross-sectional study, a questionnaire was self-filled by pharmacy undergraduate students about their knowledge of practices in research misconduct. Among the respondents (n=800), 79.12% had poor knowledge, whereas 20.88% had good knowledge about research misconduct and research ethics. Furthermore, only 9% indicated having previous training in research conduct/misconduct, whereas 36.5% had previous training in research ethics. In conclusion, this study reflects insufficient knowledge and awareness about research misconduct concepts and their main terminologies among undergraduate pharmacy students, which emphasizes the importance of implanting proper training programs/courses on research ethics during students' academic years.

show abstract

“…1, which was related to common-sense ethical practices (What are The question related to the criteria that determine authorship of a paper was another one that elicited only a few correct answers, an observation consistent with that of an earlier and similar study. 15 In both the studies, a majority of students, 72% in the present…”

Section: Self-evaluation Of the Level Of Knowledge On Research And Pu...mentioning

confidence: 60%

How much do Romanian medical students know about research ethics? A survey

Andronic¹,

Bolocan²,

Păduraru³

et al. 2022

ESE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Although scientific research in Romania has continued to expand over the past 20 years, it is unclear how prepared the country’s students are to be involved in research and to publish the results of their work. Objectives: To assess Romanian medical students’ level of knowledge about research integrity and research ethics. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 187 medical students (of which 70% were women) from Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania, was performed between September 2017 and June 2018. The survey consisted of self-evaluation with respect to three aspects, namely knowledge of research in general, that of research integrity, and that of publication integrity. The self-evaluation was followed by a set of 17 questions that tested the respondent’s knowledge. Results: On average, the proportion of correct answers was 34% (range, 12%–65%). Whereas those who had assigned low grades to themselves (a score below 5) fared poorly (fewer correct answers) in the test that followed, those who rated themselves highly (a score of 5 or higher) did not fare as well as they were expected to. The majority of respondents (83%) were willing to learn more about research integrity through courses, workshops, training programmes, etc. Conclusion: The respondents showed a low level of knowledge related to both research integrity and current standards of reporting scientific research. This lacuna demonstrates the need to train students at the beginning of their academic life because more and more of them, both undergraduate and postgraduate, are likely to be involved in scientific research.

show abstract

Knowledge of scientific misconduct in publication among medical students

Cited by 12 publications

References 0 publications

Combating Scientific Misconduct: The Role of Focused Workshops in Changing Attitudes Towards Plagiarism

Combating Scientific Misconduct: The Role of Focused Workshops in Changing Attitudes Towards Plagiarism

Evaluation of Pharmacy Students’ Knowledge and Perception of Scientific Integrity

How much do Romanian medical students know about research ethics? A survey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About