ArticleTurk pediatri arsivi2018
Knowledge and awareness of optimal use of reporting guidelines in paediatricians: A cross-sectional study.
Article in Turk pediatri arsivi, 2018. 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.
- Knowledge and awareness of the use of reporting guidelines in specialist dentists: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate pediatricians' ideas and awareness of reporting guidelines of scientific researches, as well as the use of these guidelines in routine practice. Material and Methods: This cross-sectional survey was conducted among pediatricians working at two of the largest pediatric hospitals in Ankara. The pediatricians were asked to complete a 13-item questionnaire in Turkish about reporting guidelines and the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research internet network, and their level of knowledge, awareness, and use of these guidelines were investigated. Results: A total of 224 physicians from both centers agreed to participate in the study (56.4% of the target population). The average age of the participants was 34±9.24 years, their median age was 31 (min-max: 24-63) years, and 71.4% were female physicians. The participants' median duration in their careers was 6 (min-max: 1-39) years and 63.8% had participated in a scientific study as a researcher. Forty-five (20%) of the participants had known about the reporting guidelines before and reported that they had most frequently heard about them via journals, congresses, and seminars. Twenty (26.6%) of these physicians had used the guidelines. Sixty-five (29%) of the participants had served as a reviewer for a scientific article, but only three (4.6%) stated that they had made use of the guidelines while reviewing the articles. Some 83.5% of the participants reported that they would like to be informed about reporting guidelines. Both centers had similar knowledge levels about the use of the guidelines. Conclusion: The awareness and use of reporting guidelines of scientific researches by pediatricians is insufficient.
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.