| Literature DB >> 35425778 |
Shaista Salman Guraya1,2, Muhamad Saiful Bahri Yusoff2, Fiza Rashid-Doubell1, Denis W Harkin3, Suhail H Al-Amad4, Salim Fredericks1, Mouhammad Omar O Halabi1, Natasya Abdullah5, Hatem Moussa6, Saad Imad Yousef Mallah1, Jessica Atef Nassef Sefen1, Heba Khalid A Rahman Mohamed Ishaq AlKoheji1, Manal Ebrahim Ali Althawadi1, Lana Abdulsalam Alabbasi1, Mohd Zarawi Mat Nor2, Farida Reguig6, Salman Yousuf Guraya7.
Abstract
Background: There is increasing evidence on the exponential use of technology-based social media in medical field that has led to a proliferation of unprofessional behaviors in digital realm. Educating, training, and changing the behaviors of healthcare professionals are essential elements to restrain the rising unprofessional incidents. Therefore, this research was designed to determine the impact of an interventional workshop on the medical and dental students in improving their professional behaviors in the digital world using the newly developed medical Education e-Professionalism (MEeP) framework.Entities:
Keywords: Theory of Planned Behavior; digital world; e-professionalism; professional behaviors; professional identity; professional values
Year: 2022 PMID: 35425778 PMCID: PMC9004460 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.846971
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) ISSN: 2296-858X
Mapping of competencies and constructs of the MEeP framework with eight case scenarios selected the framework evaluation.
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | Free speech vs. professionalism | Benevolence (Values) |
| Power (Behavior) | ||
| Self-direction (Identity) | ||
| 2. | The never forgiving digital world! | Communication (Behavior) |
| Self-actualization (Identity) | ||
| Reflective (Identity) | ||
| 3. | A medical student on vacation | Benevolence (Values) |
| Integrity (Values) | ||
| Reflective (Identity) | ||
| 4. | This platform is strictly professional! | Conscientious (Identity) |
| Communication (Behavior) | ||
| Self-direction (Identity) | ||
| 5. | Is anything ever private? | Power (Behavior) |
| Self-direction (Identity) | ||
| Self-actualization (Identity) | ||
| 6. | WhatsApp is a closed space! | Conscientious (Identity) |
| Integrity (Values) | ||
| Conformity (Values) | ||
| 7. | Mr. Google's wise opinion | Benevolence (Values) |
| Conscientious (Identity) | ||
| Integrity (Values) | ||
| 8. | Social media saved my son! | Conscientious (Identity) |
| Power (Behavior) | ||
| Universalism (Values) | ||
| Integrity (Values) |
Demographic characteristics of our study participants (n = 59).
|
|
|
|---|---|
|
| |
| Male | 19 (32) |
| Female | 40 (68) |
|
| |
| Pre-clinical | 29 (49) |
| Clinical | 30 (51) |
|
| |
| Yes | 38 (64) |
| No | 21 (36) |
Questionnaire reliability measure analysis in post-work-shop survey (n = 59).
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||
| Whistleblowing—Raising | Attitudes | 0.766 | 6 |
| concern | Subjective norms | 0.92 | 11 |
| Perceived behavioral control | 0.739 | 2 | |
| Intentions | 0.803 | 3 | |
| Responsible in | Attitudes | 0.828 | 8 |
| the digital world | Subjective norms | 0.959 | 12 |
| Perceived behavioral control | 0.737 | 4 | |
| Intentions | 0.854 | 3 | |
| Reflective | Attitudes | 0.873 | 8 |
| practice | Subjective norms | 0.875 | 12 |
| Perceived behavioral control | n/a | 1 | |
| Intentions | 0.761 | 3 |
Cronbach's alpha 0.7–0.79 acceptable, 0.8–0.89 good, 0.9 or higher excellent.
Cronbach's alpha cannot be calculated for 1-item measures.
A univariate analysis of MEeP domain scores following an online social media professionalism intervention (n = 59).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||||||
| Whistleblowing—Raising concern | Attitudes | 5.654 | 5.095 | 0.559 | 0.123 | 4.550 | 0.000 |
| Subjective norms | 4.030 | 3.978 | 0.052 | 0.185 | 0.300 | 0.780 | |
| Perceived behavioral control | 5.664 | 5.043 | 0.621 | 0.171 | 3.650 | 0.001 | |
| Intentions | 4.632 | 4.285 | 0.347 | 0.104 | 3.336 | 0.003 | |
| Responsible in digital world | Attitudes | 6.244 | 6.138 | 0.106 | 0.103 | 1.050 | 0.309 |
| Subjective norms | 4.965 | 4.205 | 0.759 | 0.171 | 4.439 | 0.000 | |
| Perceived behavioral control | 5.938 | 5.230 | 0.708 | 0.158 | 4.481 | 0.000 | |
| Intentions | 6.551 | 6.449 | 0.103 | 0.101 | 1.050 | 0.263 | |
| Being reflective in digital world | Attitudes | 6.392 | 5.934 | 0.458 | 0.097 | 4.750 | 0.000 |
| Subjective norms | 4.615 | 3.783 | 0.832 | 0.187 | 4.450 | 0.000 | |
| Perceived behavioral control | 5.397 | 5.914 | −0.517 | 0.162 | 3.191 | 0.009 | |
| Intentions | 4.620 | 4.782 | −0.161 | 0.102 | 1.600 | 0.118 | |
p-value < 0.001
Variables were scored from 1 to 7 where 7 scored the highest except the statements which were reversely interpreted as shown in .
A correlation analysis of MEeP domain scores following an online social media professionalism intervention (n = 59).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing—raising concern | 1. Attitudes | 1 | |||||||||||
| 2. Subjective norms | −0.133 | 1 | |||||||||||
| 3. Perceived behavioral control | 0.561 | −0.082 | 1 | ||||||||||
| 4. Intentions | 0.537 | 0.031 | 0.361 | 1 | |||||||||
| Being responsible in digital world | 5. Attitudes | 0.661 | 0.032 | 0.391 | 0.389 | 1 | |||||||
| 6. Subjective norms | −0.003 | 0.551 | 0.144 | 0.099 | 0.239 | 1 | |||||||
| 7. Perceived behavioral control | 0.586 | 0.026 | 0.487 | 0.442 | 0.587 | 0.092 | 1 | ||||||
| 8. Intentions | 0.545 | −0.112 | 0.534 | 0.227 | 0.605 | 0.124 | 0.484 | 1 | |||||
| Being reflective in digital world | 9. Attitudes | 0.689 | −0.01 | 0.405 | 0.328 | 0.578 | 0.18 | 0.557 | 0.639 | 1 | |||
| 10. Subjective norms | 0.068 | 0.578 | 0.139 | 0.168 | 0.182 | 0.490 | 0.149 | 0.097 | 0.142 | 1 | |||
| 11. Perceived behavioral control | 0.269 | −0.122 | 0.385 | 0.026 | 0.404 | −0.122 | 0.339 | 0.415 | 0.415 | −0.168 | 1 | ||
| 12. Intentions | 0.516 | 0.176 | 0.120 | 0.639 | 0.513 | 0.261 | 0.481 | 0.152 | 0.521 | 0.355 | −0.078 | 1 |
The correlation coefficient (r) values
p < 0.01;
p < 0.05, respectively.
Figure 1Path model with standardized regression coefficients for whistleblowing—raising concerns in digital world. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
Figure 2Path model with standardized regression coefficients for being responsible in digital world. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
Figure 3Path model with standardized regression coefficients for being reflective in digital world. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
The goodness of fit indices used to signify model fitness (n=59).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RMSEA | ≤0.08 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.05 |
| GFI | >0.90 | 0.92 | 0.91 | 0.94 |
| CFI | >0.90 | 0.97 | 0.94 | 0.93 |
| TLI | >0.90 | 0.93 | 0.92 | 0.96 |
| χ2/df | <3 | 2.317 | 2.290 | 2.471 |
χ2/df, Chi-square/degree of freedom; RMSEA, root mean square of error approximation; GFI, goodness of fit index; CFI, comparative fit index; NFI, normed fit index; TLI, Tucker–Lewis index.
Figure 4The process of thematic analysis of the qualitative data which depicts relationship of subthemes and themes. All themes essentially lead to possible change in an individual's behavior.