Academic Integrity Perceptions Among Health-Professions' Students: A Cross-Sectional Study in The Middle East.

A high level of professional integrity is expected from healthcare professionals, and literature suggests a relationship between unethical behavior of healthcare professionals and poor academic integrity behavior at medical school. While academic integrity is well researched in western countries, it is not so in the Middle East, which is characterized by different cultural values that may influence students' academic integrity conduct. We conducted a cross-sectional study among health-professions students at a university in the Middle East to assess perceptual differences on various cheating behaviors, as well as to explore the reasons underlying the cheating behavior. A validated survey instrument disseminated among first and second-year undergraduate students resulted in 211 complete responses and this data was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Pearson's Chi-square/ Fischer's exact test was applied to test the association of various factors with academic misconduct. The major determinants of academic misconduct were investigated using Binary Logistic regression model. The conducted analysis and the results showed that preceding cheating behavior was the only factor significantly associated with cheating in the university (p < 0.001). No association was found between cheating behavior and age, college/major, awareness regarding academic integrity, or perception of faculty response. The reasons provided by students for cheating behavior were mainly academic workload and pressure to get a good grade. Various suggestions are made to enhance academic integrity among health-professions students including organizing workshops and events by the university to increase awareness and create an academic integrity culture, providing peer guidance as well as emotional and social support. Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10805-022-09452-6.

Family readiness for evidence-based injury prevention and car seat safety in Jordan.

Primary prevention involves developing positive health behaviours designed to avert adverse health outcomes, whereas evidence-based primary prevention adopts practices that reduce illness and injury. This study's objective was to determine whether families in Jordan would adopt car safety measures after participating in an evidence-based injury prevention programme. Parents of children attending a regional government hospital in Jordan took part in an evidence-based educational class on child car restraints and car safety, six months later follow-up phone calls were made to see if the parents implemented the knowledge obtained in the class. Fifty families participated in the injury prevention class. The results showed that the evidence-based class on child restraint systems led to the adoption of the three interventions by the parents. At the time of the class 45% of parents allowed their infants to sit in the front seat, in the lap of an adult, this was reduced to 12%, being a 33% reduction. In addition, for children aged 6-12 using a seat belt in the back seat, the parents reported that their children using a seat belt increased from 13% to 70%. Finally, parents who participated were more likely to use a child car seat.

The Impact of Applying Quality Management Practices on Patient Centeredness in Jordanian Public Hospitals: Results of Predictive Modeling.

Targeting the patient's needs and preferences has become an important contributor for improving care delivery, enhancing patient satisfaction, and achieving better clinical outcomes. This study aimed to examine the impact of applying quality management practices on patient centeredness within the context of health care accreditation and to explore the differences in the views of various health care workers regarding the attributes affecting patient-centered care. Our study followed a cross-sectional survey design wherein 4 Jordanian public hospitals were investigated several months after accreditation was obtained. Total 829 clinical/nonclinical hospital staff members consented for study participation. This sample was divided into 3 main occupational categories to represent the administrators, nurses, as well as doctors and other health professionals. Using a structural equation modeling, our results indicated that the predictors of patient-centered care for both administrators and those providing clinical care were participation in the accreditation process, leadership commitment to quality improvement, and measurement of quality improvement outcomes. In particular, perceiving the importance of the hospital's engagement in the accreditation process was shown to be relevant to the administrators (gamma = 0.96), nurses (gamma = 0.80), as well as to doctors and other health professionals (gamma = 0.71). However, the administrator staff (gamma = 0.31) was less likely to perceive the influence of measuring the quality improvement outcomes on the delivery of patient-centered care than nurses (gamma = 0.59) as well as doctors and other health care providers (gamma = 0.55). From the nurses' perspectives only, patient centeredness was found to be driven by building an institutional framework that supports quality assurance in hospital settings (gamma = 0.36). In conclusion, accreditation is a leading factor for delivering patient-centered care and should be on a hospital's agenda as a strategy for continuous quality improvement.