METHODOLOGY: This study was a school-based cross-sectional study conducted among 495 secondary school teachers. The questionnaire used in this study consisted of 29 questions categorized into two sections: socio-demographic characteristics and smoking behaviour. Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) program 13.0. ANOVA; t-tests were used in univariate analysis; multiple linear regression was applied for multivariate analysis.
RESULTS: The majority of the participants were female (81.6%), in the age group ranged between 30-39 years (44%), Malay (90.1%), married (89.7%), degree holders (85.1%), with monthly income ranged between 3000-3999 Ringgit Malaysia (33.5%), from urban areas (94.7%), their specialty is social studies (33.9%) and with no family history of cancer (83.6%). The prevalence of smoking among school teachers in Malaysia was found to be 7.8%. Regarding reasons to start smoking among school teachers: the major reason was found to be relaxation (33.3%), followed by stress-relief (28.2%). Univariate analysis showed that sex, educational status, monthly income and residency were significantly associated with smoking among school teachers (p<0.001, p=0.004, p=0.031, p=0.010; respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that gender and marital status were significantly associated with smoking among school teachers (p<0.001, p=0.033; respectively).
CONCLUSION: The prevalence of smoking among school teachers in Malaysia was found to be relatively low. Sex, marital status, educational status, monthly income and residency were significantly associated with smoking among school teachers.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study design with mixed qualitative and quantitative approaches was employed and data collection was carried out primarily using self-administered questionnaire.
RESULTS: Approximately half (52.5%, n = 74) of all respondents (n = 141) reported having personally encountered at least one case of academic dishonesty involving their peers. The results also revealed the significantly higher prevalence of various forms of academic misconduct among healthcare academics compared to their non-healthcare counterparts. Although respondents were generally conscious of the negative implications associated with academic dishonesty, more than half of all cases of misconduct were not reported due to the indifferent attitude among academics. Low levels of self-discipline and integrity were found to be the major factors leading to academic misdeeds and respondents opined that university managements should be more proactive in addressing this issue.
CONCLUSIONS: The outcome of this study should serve as a clarion call for all relevant stakeholders to start making immediate amends in order to improve the current state of affairs in academia.