Article in PDF
How to Cite
Citation Manager
Readers' Comments (0)
Audio Visual Article Statistics
Link
to PUBMED
Print this Article
Send to a Friend
Advertisers
Access Statistics Resources
Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."
Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011
Dr. Shankar P.R.
"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."
Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011 Anuradha
Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.
Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020
Original article / research
Full Version
Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice of Ethical Social Media Usage amongst Dentists: A Cross-sectional Questionnaire-based Study
Correspondence Address :
Dr. Neerja Mahajan,
Professor, Department of Prosthodontics and Crown and Bridge, K. M. Shah Dental College and Hospital, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth University, Piparia, Waghodia, Vadodara-391760, Gujarat, India.
E-mail: drneerjamahajan@gmail.com
Introduction: Social Media (SM) has proven to be a valuable tool in various fields, including healthcare. However, its improper use can result in several ethical problems.
Aim: To evaluate the knowledge, attitude, and practice of ethical SM usage for professional purposes.
Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in the Department of Prosthodontics and Crown and Bridge at K.M. Shah Dental College and Hospital Vadodara, Gujarat, India between October 2022 and March 2023. A total of 319 respondents, including dental postgraduates, academicians, and dental practitioners, participated in the survey online through various SM groups. The questionnaire was created by analysing previous literature and reviewed by experts for accuracy. The survey comprised nine questions with three subsections to evaluate knowledge, attitude, and practice of ethical SM usage The survey was distributed through Google Forms, and the statistical analysis of the results was conducted using the Chi-square test (p<0.05).
Results: A survey found that 238 (75.3%) of users have used SM for over five years. The most commonly used platforms are WhatsApp, Instagram, and Facebook. A total of 153 (48.4%) knew about electronic protected health information, 156 (49.4%) knew about Digital Information Security in Health Care Act (DISHA), and 264 (83.5%) knew about consent’s importance. A total of 227 (71.8% ) of dentists saw SM as a potential risk to patient privacy, but 248 (78.5%) took consent before sharing and 252 (79.7%) used de-identification measures before posting images. A total of 197 (62.3%) of individuals have not participated in any awareness or sensitisation programs regarding the ethical implications of SM usage.
Conclusion: The study found dentists understand and prioritise patient privacy on SM. Regular training and policy updates are crucial for sensitising them regarding ethical use.
Healthcare, Informed consent, Survey
The use of social networks has become increasingly popular in recent years. A social network is a set of internet-based applications that allow users to create and share their content. SM can contribute to advancements in healthcare, particularly in research, social organisation, and offline services. However, certain gaps in research need to be addressed, such as the appropriate use of SM based on audience segmentation, evaluating its impact, and addressing privacy concerns (1). Approximately, one-third of medical professionals and organisations utilise SM platforms, such as blogs, online forums, and websites, to share their experiences through photos, videos, and messages (2).
Online social networks have provided both opportunities and challenges for healthcare users. These platforms facilitate communication among healthcare sectors, promote health programs, and allow patients to connect online. Furthermore, healthcare workers use these networks to share practice guidelines, discuss new research, and stay up-to-date with advancements in their fields. SM has become a popular mode of communication for healthcare practitioners to connect and collaborate (3).
The SM is useful for education, research, clinical trials, public health campaigns, and surveillance. SM can improve professional development and institutional image. However, using SM for research has challenges such as ensuring efficiency, information reliability, informed consent, confidentiality, internet accessibility, managing information overload, and ensuring quality interactions (4).
Digital data and global messaging have changed attitudes towards privacy, and sharing private data in public is now common, whereas it was once a breach of trust (5). To avoid negative consequences and maintain dental professionalism on SM, refrain from making false statements, sharing unauthorised information, or violating a patient’s privacy should be observed. Studying the impact of SM on dental professionalism is essential (6).
The Minister of Health and Family Welfare plans to create the “National Digital Health Authority” to regulate electronic health records and enforce data protection measures. The DISHA will establish this authority and ensure the privacy, confidentiality, and standardisation of electronic health records. However, healthcare providers need to understand the potential impact of DISHA on healthcare information (7).
The SM can offer numerous benefits for dentists, but it’s important to be mindful of potential ethical issues that can arise from improper use. Currently, there is limited data available on dentists’ awareness levels regarding the ethical conduct of SM. Thus, the current research aimed to gain a deeper understanding of dentists’ knowledge, awareness, and ethical practices related to SM use in India.
A cross-sectional study was conducted between October 2022, and March 2023 in the Department of Prosthodontics and Crown and Bridge at K.M. Shah Dental College and Hospital in Vadodara, Gujarat, India. The study was approved by the ethics committee with approval number SVIEC/ON/DENT/SRP/OCT/22/33.
The survey was conducted using Google Forms and the participants of the study were invited voluntarily to the online platform through several WhatsApp groups, Facebook, and Instagram.
Sample size calculation: The sample size was determined based on previous research conducted by Al-Khalifa KS et al., (2). Using a single proportion formula as below:
n=1.962p(1-p) (DEFF)/d2
Where, p=Estimate of the expected proportion
d=Desired level of absolute precision
Assuming the current event rate to be at least 80%.
Keeping a 5% confidence limit, for p=0.05
n=1.96×1.96 {0.8×(1-0.8)}/0.05×0.05
n=246
To ensure statistical accuracy, a minimum of 246 respondents were needed for the study. However, 30% more subjects were recruited to account for possible non responses.
Inclusion criteria: The online survey included dental private practitioners, existing academicians, and postgraduates, from various dental colleges who showed a willingness to participate.
Exclusion criteria: A person refusing consent to participate was kept as an exclusion criterion.
Study Procedure
The study’s questions were structured in three parts, which aimed to measure knowledge, attitude, and practice of ethical SM use for professional purposes. The questionnaire comprised nine items, including Yes/No and multiple-choice questions, which were reviewed by expert colleagues for face validation. To ensure clarity and avoid ambiguity, a pilot study was conducted on 10 participants who provided feedback on the questions. After validation among five subject experts, all nine questions had “Acceptable” content validity, with a Content Validation Ratio (CVR) ranging from 0.60-1. After taking into account the feedback received, some modifications to the questionnaire were made to make it more comprehensive and clear.
The survey was disseminated among all postgraduate groups and various dentist associations on Facebook and Instagram throughout India. It was administered via Google Forms, and participants were invited to take part voluntarily through several WhatsApp groups, as well as on Facebook and Instagram.
Statistical Analysis
The survey responses were collected and entered into a Microsoft Excel sheet. The data was analysed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 16.0 and response patterns and trends were identified using the Chi-square test (p <0.05). Descriptive statistics, like frequency distributions and percentages, were used to analyse the data. Statistical analyses allowed for significant relationships between variables to be identified and valuable insights to be gained into the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of dentists regarding their ethical use of SM for professional purposes.
A total of 319 respondents participated. The survey achieved a 316 (99%) response rate, as 3 (1%) of respondents who reported not using SM sites for professional purposes were excluded from the study. Before participating, all participants were asked to provide their consent to ensure they were fully informed and willing to take part in the research.
The demographic data of 316 participants is shown in (Table/Fig 1). Out of them,199 (63%) were females and 117 (37%) were males who completed the questionnaire. Among the females, 58 (51.3%) were academicians, 79 (68.1%) were private practitioners, and 62 (71.3%) were postgraduates. Among the males, 55 (48.7%) were academicians, 37 (31.9%) were private practitioners, and 25 (28.7%) were postgraduates.
The majority of the participants 238 (75.3%) have been using SM sites and apps for more than five years. The most commonly used platforms were WhatsApp 258 (81.6%), Instagram 241 (76.3%), and Facebook 223 (70.6%).
The information about dentists’ knowledge related to the ethical usage of SM is presented in (Table/Fig 2). When asked about their knowledge regarding Electronic Protected Health Information, it was found that 153 (48.4%) of participants knew about it, but 101 (32.0%) were unsure, with a p-value of 0.02. The study revealed that 124 (81.0%) of participants knew about patients’ names and ages as part of Electronic Protected Health Information, whereas 123 (80.4%) knew about patients’ physical and mental health. However, only 25 (16.3%) and 19 (12.4%) of participants were aware of Electronic Protected Health Information related to patients’ financial information and patients’ relatives’ addresses, respectively. In addition, 156 (49.4%) of participants were aware of the DISHA platform.
Regarding the privacy of patient information on SM, 264 (83.5%) of participants knew that posting or sharing any patient information without consent is a violation of their privacy, which can lead to penalties. Furthermore, 208 (78.8%) participants were aware of the fine associated with violating a patient’s privacy, 191 (72.3%) answered about the potential suspension of their license, 133 (50.4%) recognised compensation, and 98 (37.1%) acknowledged imprisonment.
The attitudes of dentists towards using SM ethically is highlighted in (Table/Fig 3). The study found that 181 (57.3%) of dentists use SM for professional purposes. However, 227 (71.8%) of the participants believed that SM posed a potential risk to patient privacy. A total of 202 (89.0%) of the participants felt that posting videos or photos of patients, and 180 (79.3%) felt that unauthorised disclosure of the patient’s identity could lead to a breach of patient privacy. Moreover, 212 (67.1%) of the participants stated that presenting patient cases on SM forums without the patient’s knowledge was not justified. In addition, 188 (88.7%) of participants believed that breaching a patient’s confidentiality was an ethical issue involved with posting information about a patient. Finally, 159 (75.0%) of the dentists gave importance to obtaining valid consent from the patient before posting any information about them on SM.
Practices regarding ethical usage of Social media among dentists is presented in (Table/Fig 4). Dentists were asked whether they take consent before posting or sharing information about patients on SM. The results showed that 248 (78.5% )of dentists responded yes. Out of these, 183 (73.8%) took written consent from the patient and 68.1% took verbal consent from the patient. Additionally, 252 (79.7%) dentists practiced de-identification measures before posting or sharing a patient’s image. Out of those, 233 (92.5%) dentists used blurring out faces and nametags, and 153 (60.7%) used the removal of all identifying information, including identifiable marks, and tattoos.
Moreover, the survey revealed that 197 (62.3%) of dentists did not attend any sensitisation programs. Only 85 (26.9%) attended and out of those, 51 (60.0%) of dentists attended less than two programs per year.
The use of SM has become an important part of our personal and professional lives, and all healthcare workers must be trained on how to use it appropriately (8). SM and networks have become valuable means of information sharing due to their low cost, democratic nature, and adaptability. However, the misuse of these platforms, as well as ethical and legal violations resulting from their uncontrolled use, may cause significant harm and result in unfavourable legal outcomes (9). SM in healthcare must balance data benefits with privacy concerns. User confidentiality is crucial, and issues of data misuse must be prevented (10).
SM can be a useful tool for qualitative researchers if used in an ethical manner that prioritises privacy and confidentiality. Encouraging researchers to explore the benefits of this innovative method could lead to new insights and perspectives that can enhance the research process. However, it is important to consider any potential risks and ensure that the benefits of using SM outweigh any potential negative impacts on research participants. By conducting research responsibly and thoughtfully, we can continue to push the boundaries of knowledge and understanding (11).
It is essential to ensure that patient privacy, confidentiality, and informed consent are protected. When communicating through SM, it is crucial to exercise caution and care to maintain ethical standards and good practices (12). SM is an effective tool for dental education (13),(14) and can be successfully integrated into private practices (15), as demonstrated by studies conducted in India.
According to the present survey, most of the participants were private practitioners and postgraduate students. Almost all dentists have been using SM for more than five years, with WhatsApp, Instagram, and Facebook being the most popular platforms. The study’s findings are consistent with previous research, emphasising the significance of healthcare professionals accepting this usage and being mindful of its professional implications (16),(17),(18).
Few studies in the past literature have given contradictory results stating that medical students lacked sufficient knowledge about the hazards of online SM (19) and even lacked awareness of potential ethical issues (20). Nevertheless, in the past few years, there has been tremendous improvement in knowledge and usage of these social platforms for healthcare usage. With the increasing shift towards e-platforms in dental education, it is crucial to focus on teaching the major challenges that arise, such as effectively managing health knowledge, communicating efficiently, maintaining ethical standards, addressing concerns over user privacy, and handling negative feedback (21). These challenges should be given more emphasis in the curriculum to prepare dental students for the realities of the digital age.
In the present survey, a concerning 62.3% of individuals had not participated in any awareness or sensitisation programs regarding the ethical implications of SM usage. This means that patient privacy and confidentiality may not always be protected, which underscores the importance of promoting education and awareness in this area.
As a trainee, it is crucial to develop professional online etiquette early on, obtain appropriate written consent, and ensure that identifiable patient information is not disclosed through SM (22),(23). One can follow the guidelines for dental photography provided by Robert EA et al., which emphasise the importance of cloning adjacent skin, blurring, using an opaque box, and applying coarse pixilation. These guidelines can help maintain the confidentiality of patient information and protect their privacy (24).
Limitation(s)
One limitation of the present study pertains to the data collection method used, which involved an electronic survey. The present survey method assumes that respondents have access to and are comfortable using technology. Consequently, it may not be easy to differentiate between active SM users and those who have accounts but do not actively use them. Future research should analyse individual SM platforms’ effects on dental practice and education among healthcare workers in large groups.
The study found that while dentists have a fair understanding, they still maintain positive attitudes and ethical practices toward their patients’ privacy needs on SM. Nonetheless, it is crucial to arrange regular workshops and training programs to educate dentists on the ethical use of SM for professional purposes. It is also important to prioritise timely updates to existing policies and guidelines to regulate the use of SM.
DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2024/69573.19733
Date of Submission: Jan 13, 2024
Date of Peer Review: Mar 27, 2024
Date of Acceptance: Jun 25, 2024
Date of Publishing: Aug 01, 2024
AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA
PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jan 14, 2024
• Manual Googling: Mar 29, 2024
• iThenticate Software: Jun 24, 2024 (8%)
ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin
EMENDATIONS: 7
- Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
- Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
- Academic Search Complete Database
- Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
- Embase
- EBSCOhost
- Google Scholar
- HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
- Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
- Journal seek Database
- Popline (reproductive health literature)
- www.omnimedicalsearch.com