Biomedical doctoral students’ research practices when facing dilemmas: two vignette-based randomized control trials

V.T Nguyen, M. K. Sharp, C. Superchi, G. Baron, K. Glonti,D. Blanco, M. Olsen,T.T Vo Tat,C. Olarte Parra,A. Névéol, D. Hren,P. Ravaud,I. Boutron

Scientific reports(2023)

引用 0|浏览0
暂无评分
摘要
Our aim was to describe the research practices of doctoral students facing a dilemma to research integrity and to assess the impact of inappropriate research environments, i.e. exposure to (a) a post-doctoral researcher who committed a Detrimental Research Practice (DRP) in a similar situation and (b) a supervisor who did not oppose the DRP. We conducted two 2-arm, parallel-group randomized controlled trials. We created 10 vignettes describing a realistic dilemma with two alternative courses of action (good practice versus DRP). 630 PhD students were randomized through an online system to a vignette (a) with (n = 151) or without (n = 164) exposure to a post-doctoral researcher; (b) with (n = 155) or without (n = 160) exposure to a supervisor. The primary outcome was a score from − 5 to + 5, where positive scores indicated the choice of DRP and negative scores indicated good practice. Overall, 37% of unexposed participants chose to commit DRP with important variation across vignettes (minimum 10%; maximum 66%). The mean difference [95%CI] was 0.17 [− 0.65 to 0.99;], p = 0.65 when exposed to the post-doctoral researcher, and 0.79 [− 0.38; 1.94], p = 0.16, when exposed to the supervisor. In conclusion, we did not find evidence of an impact of postdoctoral researchers and supervisors on student research practices. Trial registration: NCT04263805, NCT04263506 (registration date 11 February 2020).
更多
查看译文
关键词
trials,research practices,biomedical doctoral students,dilemmas,vignette-based
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要