ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitudes and practices in thromboelastography application.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to investigate the knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of healthcare professionals regarding thromboelastography (TEG). Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted at Tongren Hospital in Shanghai from January to February 2025. Demographic data, knowledge, attitude, and practices scores, were collected and evaluated via a self-developed questionnaire. Results: A total of 218 valid responses were included in the analysis. Of the participants, 130 (59.63%) were physicians, and 88 (40.37%) were nurses. TEG-related training had been received by 149 (68.35%) of the participants. The mean proficiency score for TEG use was 5.83 ± 2.90 (range: 0-10). The mean scores for knowledge, attitude, and practice were 8.10 ± 2.44 (range: 0-12), 30.81 ± 7.11 (range: 8-40), and 28.92 ± 8.87 (range: 8-40), respectively. Significant positive correlations were observed between knowledge and attitude ( Conclusion: The majority of healthcare professionals demonstrated inadequate knowledge, positive attitudes, and optimal practices regarding TEG. Enhanced training programs focused on TEG could improve proficiency and optimize its clinical application, especially for professionals with fewer years of experience.
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.