Search published articles


Showing 3 results for Clinical Ethics
Comparing the Perspectives of Patients and Staff in Obstetrics and Gynecology Operating Rooms on Patient Privacy
Farshid Mohammadmousaei, Zeinab Raiesifar, Seyed Ali Mousavi, Nastaran Khorsandi Bahar, Fatemeh Esmaelzadeh,
Volume 18, Issue 1 (3-2025)
Abstract
Maintaining patient privacy is a fundamental right of patients and an ethical duty of healthcare professionals. The present descriptive, cross-sectional study was conducted in 2022 to compare the perspectives of patients and staff in obstetrics and gynecology operating rooms in Mashhad, Iran, on the extent to which patient privacy was preserved. Patients were selected using random sampling in the operating rooms of hospitals affiliated with Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. Data were collected through a demographic information form and a standardized questionnaire to assess hospitalized patients’ privacy. Data were analyzed via SPSS-22, utilizing descriptive and inferential statistics, with a significance level of P<0.05. The mean ages of patients and staff participating in this study were 39.07±12.56 and 31.65±8.42 years, respectively. The mean score of preserving privacy from the patients' perspective was 38.92±22.41, whereas from the staff's perspective, it was 64.26±8.02, and the difference was statistically significant (p=0.0001). The lowest scores in both groups for personal privacy were 4.97±8.77 for patients and 13.37±2.66 for staff. Results indicated that the staff perceived the level of preserving patient privacy to be above average, while patients considered it below average. Therefore, given the patients’ specific conditions, high stress levels, and physical and mental limitations to support themselves, it is essential to implement targeted training and take necessary measures to encourage the staff to pay more attention to patient privacy and raise patient awareness in this regard.

Explaining Perceptions of Discharge Against Medical Advice as a Patient’s Legal Right: A Qualitative Study
Hossein Motaarefi, Shahriar Sakhaei, Amin Soheili, Hassan Ebrahimpour Sadagheyani,
Volume 18, Issue 1 (3-2025)
Abstract
 Patients’ perceptions of healthcare service quality and satisfaction with their legal rights constitute the primary objective of the care team and should be considered a criterion for accreditation evaluation. In this regard, a thorough examination of healthcare providers’ and patients’ perceptions, emotions, and experiences regarding the reasons for ‘Discharge Against Medical Advice’—as a patient’s legal right—can help identify hidden factors influenced by temporal and spatial conditions. This qualitative study employed a conventional content analysis approach, involving semi-structured interviews with 24  healthcare providers and patients selected purposively. Researchers repeatedly reviewed recorded content and notes to code the data. Subsequently, key codes and themes were clustered, categorized into specific topics, and labeled. Finally, an interpretation of the obtained data reflecting the study’s approach was presented. Through conventional content analysis, 203 codes were extracted. After categorization, four subthemes, including human factors, processes, facilities, and environment, were identified under the core theme of “uncertainty and distrust” as reasons for discharge against medical advice. Discharge against medical advice is recognized as both a challenge for hospital accreditation and an adverse outcome for patients. Addressing uncertainty-related issues and fostering public trust through team collaboration and implementing novel policies can mitigate discharge against medical advice.

Design and Psychometric Evaluation of a Questionnaire on Factors Associated with Unethical Research Practices among Faculty Members and Researchers in the Ministry of Health
Rahele Samouei, Shokoofeh Samouei, Narges Meshkineh ,
Volume 18, Issue 1 (3-2025)
Abstract
Faculty members and researchers bear the greatest responsibility for producing scientific research outputs due to the nature of their profession and mission. Given the role of ethical principles in ensuring evidence-based research, their impact on research utilization in society, and the importance of scientific evaluations, this study was conducted to design and psychometrically evaluate a questionnaire on factors related to unethical research practices among researchers. This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2024 among faculty members and researchers at medical sciences universities in Iran. Based on a preliminary qualitative study, 40 items were initially generated for the questionnaire. The validity of the questionnaire was assessed through face validity, content validity (CVR, CVI), and criterion validity (divergent and convergent). Besides, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and reliability testing (Cronbach's alpha) were performed. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation coefficient, and Student's t-test. During the content validity assessment, 11 researchers evaluated the items. Applying cutoff scores of 0.59 for CVR and 0.79 and above for CVI, 16 out of 40 items were removed, retaining 24 items. Exploratory factor analysis revealed five key factors, including “researchers’ irresponsible and unprofessional behaviors and beliefs”, “inefficient basis for competition and career advancement among researchers”, “lack of awareness and up-to-date knowledge among researchers”, “inefficient organizational culture and policies”, and “lack of supervision over researchers and research”. Descriptive findings indicated significant differences in the mean scores of factors associated with unethical research practices of researchers by gender (P=0.002) and organizational position (P=0.004), but not by education level. The findings from this study confirmed the strong psychometric properties of the questionnaire on factors related to unethical research practices.

Page 1 from 1     

© 2026 , Tehran University of Medical Sciences, CC BY-NC 4.0

Designed & Developed by: Yektaweb