No abstract available.
Humans ; Peer Review/*ethics ; Professional Misconduct/*ethics ; Publishing/*ethics

PURPOSE: This study investigated medical students' attitudes toward academic misconduct that occurs in the learning environment during the pre-clinical and clinical periods. METHODS: Third-year medical students from seven medical schools were invited to participate in this study. A total of 337 of the 557 (60.5%) students completed an inventory assessing their attitudes toward academic misconduct. The inventory covered seven factors: scientific misconduct (eight items), irresponsibility in class (six items), disrespectful behavior in patient care (five items), dishonesty in clerkship tasks (four items), free riding on group assignments (four items), irresponsibility during clerkship (two items), and cheating on examinations (one item). RESULTS: Medical students showed a strict attitude toward academic misconduct such as cheating on examinations and disrespectful behavior in patient care, but they showed a less rigorous attitude toward dishonesty in clerkship tasks and irresponsibility in class. There was no difference in students' attitudes toward unprofessional behaviors by gender. The graduate medical school students showed a stricter attitude toward some factors of academic misconduct than the medical college students. This difference was significant for irresponsibility in class, disrespectful behavior in patient care, and free riding on group assignments. CONCLUSION: This study indicates a critical vulnerability in medical students' professionalism toward academic integrity and responsibility. Further study evidence is needed to confirm whether this professionalism lapse is confined only to this population or is pervasive in other medical schools as well.
Ethics ; Humans ; Learning ; Patient Care ; Professional Misconduct ; Professionalism ; Schools, Medical ; Scientific Misconduct ; Students, Medical

PURPOSE: Identifying medical students' perceptions of and experiences with unprofessional behavior in school can help them develop and maintain higher standards of professional ethics. The aim of this study was to develop an instrument that assesses medical students' attitudes toward academic misconduct. METHODS: A draft version of the questionnaire form was developed, based on an extensive literature review and iterative discussions. The validity of the content of this draft form was evaluated by medical students, physicians, and education specialists. A total of 803 medical students answered the questionnaire. Exploratory factor analysis was performed using principal axis factoring and Varimax rotation. A confirmatory factor analysis was also conducted by root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and comparative fit index (CFI). The internal consistency of the scales was calculated using the Cronbach alpha statistic. RESULTS: The exploratory factor analysis generated 6 factors with 29 items: scientific misconduct (8 items); irresponsibility in the class (6 items); disrespectful behavior in patient care (5 items); dishonesty in clerkship tasks (4 items); free-riding on group assignments (4 items); and irresponsibility during clerkship (2 items). After adding a single item that addressed cheating on examinations, a 30-item inventory was developed. A confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated a favorable RMSEA (0.082) and reasonable fit (CFI, 0.844). The coefficient alpha for each factor varied between 0.80 and 0.90. CONCLUSION: Our instrument is useful in identifying students' ethical standards with regard to academics and examining the prevalence of unprofessional behavior in medical students.
Ethics, Professional ; Humans ; Patient Care ; Prevalence ; Scientific Misconduct ; Specialization ; Students, Medical ; Weights and Measures ; Surveys and Questionnaires

The rapid developments of science and technology in China over recent decades, particularly in biomedical research, have brought forward serious challenges regarding ethical governance. Recently, Jian-kui HE, a Chinese scientist, claimed to have "created" the first gene-edited babies, designed to be naturally immune to the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The news immediately triggered widespread criticism, denouncement, and debate over the scientific and ethical legitimacy of HE's genetic experiments. China's guidelines and regulations have banned germline genome editing on human embryos for clinical use because of scientific and ethical concerns, in accordance with the international consensus. HE's human experimentation has not only violated these Chinese regulations, but also breached other ethical and regulatory norms. These include questionable scientific value, unreasonable risk-benefit ratio, illegitimate ethics review, invalid informed consent, and regulatory misconduct. This series of ethical failings of HE and his team reveal the institutional failure of the current ethics governance system which largely depends on scientist's self-regulation. The incident highlights the need for urgent improvement of ethics governance at all levels, the enforcement of technical and ethical guidelines, and the establishment of laws relating to such bioethical issues.
CRISPR-Cas Systems ; China ; Consent Forms/ethics* ; Ethics, Medical ; Female ; Gene Editing/legislation & jurisprudence* ; Gene Knockout Techniques/ethics* ; HIV Infections/prevention & control* ; Human Experimentation/legislation & jurisprudence* ; Humans ; Infant, Newborn ; Pregnancy ; Professional Misconduct/ethics* ; Receptors, CCR5/genetics*