ArticleSaudi medical journal2019
Pathology awareness in patients and patient's relatives applying to a pathology laboratory.
Article in Saudi medical journal, 2019. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate pathology awareness in patients applying to a pathology laboratory. Method: This cross-sectional study included 150 patients and patients' relatives. A questionnaire, prepared by the researchers according to the literature, was administered at the Pathology Laboratory, Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya, Turkey on May 2018.
resultsOf the participants, 79 (52.7%) were female and 71 (47.3%) were male. The mean age was 39.56±14.16 years old. Ninety-eight (65.3%) of them thought that patients do not have right to choose their pathologist. Of the participants, 24 (16%) did not know that the medical school had to be completed in order to become a pathologist and 73 (48.7%) of them did not know that 4 years postgraduate training was required. Fifty-nine (39.3%) of the participants did not know the pathologists were a medical doctor. While 89 participants (59.4%) had no idea what "frozen section" means, 66 people (44%) did not know that the pathologist uses microscope and 64 (42.7%) of them thought that all diseases could be diagnosed 100% by pathological examination. Forty-six (30.7%) of the participants thought that all specimens are not needed to be examined. Conclusion: The knowledge and awareness of the participants about the pathology discipline came out to be inadequate.
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.