ArticleJMIR medical education2026
Main Recommendations for Developing Education and Awareness Strategies for Rare Diseases: Scoping Review.
Article in JMIR medical education, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccording to the World Health Organization, education and awareness are essential components of public health promotion strategies. In the context of rare diseases (RDs), these actions are particularly critical because of persistent stigma, fragmented knowledge, and the frequent absence of consolidated clinical and organizational protocols. These gaps often result in inappropriate referrals, inefficient care pathways, unnecessary procedures, and delays in diagnosis, negatively affecting health outcomes and quality of life.
objectiveThis study aimed to identify and systematize the main recommendations for health education and awareness in the field of RDs, supporting the development of health care programs, public policies, and strategic initiatives.
methodsWe formulated the research question using the Population, Concept, and Context framework. This scoping review followed the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines to ensure methodological transparency. Eligible records included peer-reviewed research articles of any design and official documents published in Portuguese, English, or Spanish, with no time restrictions. Records that did not address the research question, lacked sufficient rigor, or focused exclusively on specific subgroups of RDs were excluded. Searches were performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, as well as gray literature. Study selection and data extraction were conducted by the research team, with disagreements resolved and the included sources reviewed by an RDs expert. Data were thematically categorized by consensus, and descriptive statistics were used to summarize findings.
resultsA total of 58 sources of evidence were included. Among the identified recommendations related to education and awareness, most sources focused on professional education and training (49/58, 84.4%), followed by public policies and intersectoral integration (36/58, 62%), education and awareness for the general population (28/58, 48.2%), digital technologies (27/58, 46.5%), emotional support and experience sharing (20/58, 34.4%), and awareness events and dates (8/58, 13.7%). Percentages exceed 100% because individual sources could report multiple recommendations. Overall, the literature emphasizes integrating RDs content into educational initiatives and strengthening professional competencies, intersectoral collaboration, digital technologies, and broader awareness strategies.
conclusionsThis scoping review systematically mapped and organized recommendations from diverse sources of evidence on strategies for health education and awareness related to RDs. It synthesizes heterogeneous evidence using a structured approach to provide a comprehensive overview of strategies in this field, consolidating dispersed knowledge into a coherent body of evidence. The findings may inform improvements in health services, as well as professional and managerial practices, and initiatives aimed at supporting patients, families, and advocacy groups involved in RDs, with potential implications for strengthening diagnostic processes, referral coordination, and more equitable access to information and care.
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.