ArticleDer Nervenarzt2005
[Stroke. Public knowledge and information sources].
Article in Der Nervenarzt, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- An educational multimedia campaign has differential effects on public stroke knowledge and care-seeking behavior.Journal of neurology · 2008Article
- First aid in acute stroke : introducing a concept of first action to laypersons.Journal of neurology · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Modern stroke care requires urgent initiation of treatment. Thus, rapid recognition of cerebrovascular incidents by medical laypersons is mandatory. Accordingly, public knowledge of stroke warning signs and adequate action is very important. Little is known about the level of knowledge among the general public and use and effect of various sources of information. In first aid training programs conducted by the St. John Ambulance in Bavaria, participants were questioned if and from what source they already got information about stroke. Additionally they were asked to list stroke warning signs and to describe what a stroke is. Altogether 532 subjects filled out the questionnaire; 419 stated that they already had heard something about stroke (53.7% male, mean age 29.4 years). Sources of information were: personal experience with affected patients (30.1%), TV/radio (22.1%), newspaper (18.4%) and relatives/friends (17.2%). Subjects with prior information listed significantly more warning signs/symptoms compared with those without previous information (1.76 vs. 0.63; p<0.01). Participants using the source "TV/radio" named fewer warning signs than those using the sources "newspaper" or "affected patients" (p<0.01). Prior information was effective in enhancing knowledge about stroke. However, we found significant differences related to the source of information. Since experiences gathered from personal contact with affected patients were stated most frequently, leading to better knowledge than information gained from mass media, subsequently acute care and rehabilitation would be a good opportunity for providing information about stroke to proxies and visitors of the patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.