ArticleBMC gastroenterology2024
Insights into the current state of knowledge, practice, and attitudes of physicians regarding gastrointestinal motility disorders in Egypt.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2024. 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.
- Achalasia: Physician Practices and Knowledge in Türkiye.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastrointestinal (GI) motility disorders are common in clinical settings, but physicians still lack sufficient understanding and effective management of these conditions.
methodsThis research assessed Egyptian physicians' knowledge, practices, and attitudes towards GI motility disorders. A cross-sectional survey employing a self-administered questionnaire was carried out among physicians in Egypt. The questionnaire addressed various aspects of physicians' understanding, practices, and attitudes regarding GI motility disorders. Data analysis was conducted using descriptive statistics and presented as frequencies and percentages.
resultsA total of 462 physicians took part in the study. Although nearly two-thirds of them knew about GI motility studies, a notable proportion lacked adequate knowledge about GI motility disorders. Notably, 84.2% correctly identified dysphagia as a critical symptom suggestive of an upper GI motility disorder. However, 13.4% incorrectly linked hematemesis with an upper GI motility disorder, and 16.7% expressed uncertainty. In terms of practice, around half of the participants encountered a small number of patients with GI motility disorders (less than 5 per week or even fewer). Only 29.7% felt confident in managing patients with motility disorders. Most participating physicians expressed a willingness to participate in training programs focused on motility disorders.
conclusionsThis study underscores a knowledge gap among Egyptian physicians concerning GI motility disorders. It suggests the necessity of tailored education and training programs to improve their competency and practice in this domain.
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.