ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2022
Current medical education improves OSA-related knowledge but not confidence in residents: An underappreciated public health risk.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- ResidentsZhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciencesArticle
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is the most common sleep-related breathing disorder and induces a growing health care burden. However, a large proportion of patients with OSA do not receive appropriate treatment and are underdiagnosed or misdiagnosed in primary care. A contributing factor to the phenomenon is the lack of education, which reflects the current inadequacies in medical education. Therefore, assessing the level of knowledge and attitudes toward OSA and associated factors among resident physicians is highly warranted. Methods: A validated questionnaire, the OSA Knowledge and Attitudes (OSAKA) questionnaire was distributed to residents who had already completed undergraduate education and were attending an internal medicine residency training program. The questionnaire consists of 2 parts: including an assessment of (1) OSA-related knowledge involving epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and treatment; (2) the importance of OSA and confidence in diagnosing and treating OSA patients. Other information including demographics, training experience, and questions exploring the future form of the sleep breathing disorder course was collected together. Results: Of the 160 residents who participated in the survey, 153 (95.6%) completed the survey and the mean total knowledge score was 12.6/18 (70% correct). Although all respondents believed that OSA was an important clinical disorder, only a minority of the residents felt confident in identifying patients at risk for OSA (38%), managing OSA patients (27.5%), or continuous positive airway pressure therapy (CPAP) (26.2%). We found that OSA training experience significantly increased knowledge scores ( Conclusion: Despite adequate knowledge of OSA, there was still a generalized lack of confidence in the management of OSA patients among residents. Current medical education can not build enough confidence for physicians, which may in turn affect patients' trust and reduce long-term compliance. Untreated OSA places a significant health threat and economic burden on not only the patients but also their families and society, causing an underappreciated public health risk. In the future, merely increasing OSA courses is not sufficient, a more specific focus on the course format and training effect is required.
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.