ArticleScientific reports2025
Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of healthcare professionals regarding neuropathic pain in spinal cord injury in Hunan, China.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To evaluate healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitude, and practice regarding spinal cord injury neuropathic pain in Hunan Province, China. This cross-sectional study was conducted between August 2024 and September 2024 in Hunan Province and included healthcare professionals. The questionnaire was self-designed (Cronbach's α = 0.954) to collect demographic and KAP data. A structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis was performed to determine the relationships among KAP dimensions. The analysis included 402 valid questionnaires. Among them, 28.1% were working in the rehabilitation department, 62.2% had experience in treating patients with SCI, 59.5% had experience in treating patients with SCI-NP, 79.6% were working in a public tertiary hospital, and 85.1% were working at a teaching hospital. The mean knowledge, attitude, and practice scores were 13.02 ± 8.24 (/28, 46.5%), 34.80 ± 5.99 (/40, 87.0%), and 21.56 ± 8.03 (/35, 61.6%), indicating poor knowledge, positive attitudes, and moderate practice, respectively. SEM analysis indicated knowledge directly influenced attitudes (β = 0.511, P < 0.001) and practices (β = 0.571, P < 0.001) and indirectly influenced practice (β = 0.093, P < 0.001), while attitudes directly influenced practice (β = 0.181, P < 0.001). Similar relationships were observed in physicians and nurses. Healthcare professionals exhibit poor knowledge, positive attitudes, and moderate practice regarding SCI-NP. Educational initiatives are needed to enhance their KAP, translating improved knowledge and attitudes into better practices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.