Research Ethics Knowledge and Attitudes Among Physicians in Three Tertiary Hospitals in Nouakchott, Mauritania: A 2018–2019 Cross-Sectional Survey: Research Article

Meimouna Sidi Deoula; Nivine Abbas; Khaoula El Kinany; Mohamedou Hmeied Maham; Wael Al-Delaimy

doi:10.58372/2835-6276.1419

Authors

Meimouna Sidi Deoula
Nivine Abbas
Khaoula El Kinany
Mohamedou Hmeied Maham
Wael Al-Delaimy

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58372/2835-6276.1419

Keywords:

research ethics, bioethics, physicians, research integrity, ethics committees, informed consent, Mauritania

Abstract

Background: Research involving human participants must be conducted according to established ethical principles to protect participants and preserve scientific integrity. However, access to research ethics training and independent ethical review remains uneven in many low- and middle-income settings. Empirical evidence concerning physicians’ knowledge and attitudes toward research ethics in Mauritania is limited. This study assessed research ethics training, knowledge, and attitudes among physicians working in three tertiary hospitals in Nouakchott.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among physicians working in three tertiary hospitals in Nouakchott, Mauritania, between November 2018 and March 2019. A structured, self-administered questionnaire adapted from previously published instruments was translated from English into French by the research team. The questionnaire was distributed to 260 physicians. A total of 110 physicians returned completed questionnaires and were included in the analysis, corresponding to a response rate of 42.3%. Descriptive analyses were performed using SPSS version 20.

Results: Among the 110 respondents, 86 (78.2%) were men and 24 (21.8%) were women. Eighty-one participants (73.6%) reported no previous training in research ethics. Seventy-three participants (66.4%) agreed or strongly agreed that a research ethics committee was needed in every institution. However, 44 participants (40.0%) agreed or strongly agreed that fabricating data to improve research outcomes could be acceptable when no harm was caused to patients. Other responses revealed uncertainty or incorrect understanding concerning informed consent, protection of vulnerable populations, authorship, plagiarism, and the functions of research ethics committees.

Conclusion: Physicians participating in this survey demonstrated important gaps in research ethics training and understanding. The findings also identified concerning attitudes toward research misconduct and incomplete recognition of the role of research ethics committees. Because the study was conducted in three tertiary hospitals and had a response rate of 42.3%, the results should not be generalized to all physicians in Mauritania. Further nationally representative research and strengthened research ethics education are warranted.

References

Coleman CH. Introduction to research with human participants. In: Orentlicher D, Hervey TK, editors. The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Health Law. Oxford University Press; 2021. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190846756.013.17

Office for Human Research Protections. The Belmont Report. US Department of Health and Human Services; 2010. Available from: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/index.html

Sánchez GS, Bezhold GA, Farnós IA. Research ethics: From principles to practical aspects. An Pediatr. 2023. doi:10.1016/j.anpede.2023.06.016

Vasco-Morales S, Vasco-Toapanta C, Guanoluisa-Vasco A, Vasco-Toapanta G, Toapanta-Pinta P. Human rights in science: Observations from ethics committees on medical research protocols. Rev Gest Soc Ambient. 2024. doi:10.24857/rgsa.v18n10-074

Mehta P, Zimba O, Gasparyan A, Seiil B, Yessirkepov M. Ethics committees: Structure, roles, and issues. J Korean Med Sci. 2023;38:e198. doi:10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e198

Gómez AP. Research ethics committees. Mex Bioeth Rev ICSA. 2023. doi:10.29057/mbr.v5i9.11193

Stojkovic VJ, Cvjetković S, Stamenković Ž, Janković J, Piperac P, Ristic DI, et al. Research ethics education needs assessment in Serbian medical researchers. Ethics Behav. 2024;35:320–332. doi:10.1080/10508422.2024.2382402

Gopichandran V. Development of capacity for research ethics review in low- and middle-income countries: Need for a systems approach. Public Health Action. 2017;7(1):1–2. doi:10.5588/pha.17.0010

Chaudhry I, Thurtle V, Foday E, Leather A, Samai M, Wurie H, et al. Strengthening ethics committees for health-related research in sub-Saharan Africa: A scoping review. BMJ Open. 2022;12:e062847. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062847

Azakir B, Mobarak H, Najjar SA, Naga AAE, Mashaal N. Knowledge and attitudes of physicians toward research ethics and scientific misconduct in Lebanon. BMC Med Ethics. 2020;21:39. doi:10.1186/s12910-020-00475-5

Demour SAA, Alzoubi K, Alabsi A, Abdallat SA, Alzayed A. Knowledge, awareness, and attitudes about research ethics committees and informed consent among resident doctors. Int J Gen Med. 2019;12:141–145. doi:10.2147/IJGM.S197511

Silaigwana B, Wassenaar D. Biomedical research ethics committees in sub-Saharan Africa. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2015;10:169–184. doi:10.1177/1556264615575511

Essack Z, Ndebele P, Matisonn H, de Vries J, Moodley K, Rennie S, et al. Health research ethics in Southern Africa: Building capacity and cultivating excellence. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2025. doi:10.1177/15562646251347549

Munoli S, Niveditha G, Deepthi R. Knowledge, attitude and practice of research ethics among medical faculty in a teaching hospital. Int J Basic Clin Pharmacol. 2017;6:913–918. doi:10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20171103

McAllister S, Coxon K, Murrells T, Sandall J. Healthcare professionals’ attitudes, knowledge and self-efficacy levels regarding the use of self-hypnosis in childbirth: A prospective questionnaire survey. Midwifery. 2017;47:8–14. doi:10.1016/j.midw.2017.01.017

Mohamed A, Ghanem M, Kassem A. Knowledge, perceptions and practices towards medical ethics among physician residents of University of Alexandria Hospitals, Egypt. East Mediterr Health J. 2012;18(9):935–945. doi:10.26719/2012.18.9.935

Tarboush N, Alkayed Z, Alzoubi K, Al-Delaimy W. The understanding of research ethics at health sciences schools in Jordan: A cross-sectional study. BMC Med Educ. 2020;20:121. doi:10.1186/s12909-020-02040-5

Alahmad G, Alshahrani K, Alduhaim RA, Alhelal R, Faden RM, Shaheen N. Awareness of medical professionals regarding research ethics in a tertiary care hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: A survey to assess training needs. Healthcare. 2023;11:2718. doi:10.3390/healthcare11202718

Rauf A, Dadgaran I, Kojidi HM, Biroudian S, Delpasand K. Effectiveness of training ethical principles in clinical trials on the awareness of health professionals. Educ Res Med Sci. 2025. doi:10.5812/ermsj-157825

Felaefel M, Salem M, Jaafar R, Jassim G, Edwards H, Rashid-Doubell F, et al. A cross-sectional survey study to assess prevalence and attitudes regarding research misconduct among investigators in the Middle East. J Acad Ethics. 2018;16:71–87. doi:10.1007/s10805-017-9295-9