ArticlePloS one2019
Differences in the awareness of stroke symptoms and emergency response by occupation in the Korean general population.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hypertension Education, Provider, and Cardio-Cerebrovascular Symptom Awareness: 2024 Korea Community Health Survey.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2026Article
- Global Awareness and Response to Early Symptoms of Acute Stroke: A Systematic Literature Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Engaging social activities prevent stroke and myocardial infraction by raising awareness of warning symptoms: A cross-sectional survey study.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Awareness, Recognition, and Response to Stroke among the General Public-An Observational Study.Journal of neurosciences in rural practice · 2021Article
- Stroke knowledge among emergency centre visitors: A cross-sectional multicenter survey.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We evaluated the difference in awareness of stroke warning signs (SWS) and emergency response among occupational groups in the community-dwelling population. From the 2016 Korea Community Health Survey, a total of 10,445 individuals without stroke were included in the analysis. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to explore the association of occupation with awareness of SWS and correct emergency response. SWS included the following: sudden numbness or weakness, sudden difficulty speaking or understanding speech, sudden dizziness, sudden visual impairment, and sudden severe headache. Respondents' occupation was classified into six groups: managers and professionals (MP); clerks; service and sales workers (SSW); agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers (AFFW); mechanical and manual laborers (MML); or housewives and unemployed people (HUP). Awareness of each SWS was the same with the highest for MP and lowest for AFFW. After adjusting for socio-demographic factors, compared to MP (reference), AFFW (odds ratio 0.49; 95% confidence interval 0.36-0.67), HUP (0.55; 0.40-0.75), MML (0.57; 0.42-0.79), and SSW (0.62; 0.45-0.86) had significantly lower ORs for knowing at least one of the SWS. Additionally, AFFW (0.79; 0.66-0.96) and MML (0.76; 0.63-0.91) had significantly lower ORs for knowing all five SWS compared to MP. However, there was no significant occupational difference in correct emergency response when a stroke occurred. To improve stroke literacy and to reduce the disparity of awareness of SWS in community settings, public health efforts with an emphasis on AFFW and MML are needed.
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.