ArticleBMJ open2025
Knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding pulmonary rehabilitation among patients with chronic respiratory diseases: a cross-sectional questionnaire-based study in a tertiary hospital in China.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding transfusion-related acute lung injury among healthcare providers in Jiangsu: a multicenter cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding traditional Chinese medicine therapies among COPD patients: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice of Chronic Prostatitis Patients Regarding Electrophysiological Therapy in a Chinese Tertiary Hospital: A Cross-Sectional SEM Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) of patients with chronic respiratory diseases towards pulmonary rehabilitation.
designCross-sectional, web-based questionnaire study.
settingTertiary healthcare hospital in Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, China.
participantsA total of 511 patients with chronic respiratory diseases were recruited from the hospital's outpatient and inpatient departments. After data cleaning, 501 valid responses (98.04% valid response rate) were analysed. Participants were aged 18 or older, able to complete the questionnaire independently or with assistance and included individuals from diverse demographic backgrounds. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes included KAP scores related to pulmonary rehabilitation. The secondary outcome assessed the association between demographic factors (age, gender, income, education, smoking status) and KAP scores using structural equation modelling (SEM).
resultsThe mean KAP scores were 1.26±2.85 for knowledge, 30.46±3.63 for attitudes and 34.58±5.55 for practices. SEM analysis showed that knowledge directly influenced attitudes (β=-0.538, p<0.001) and both knowledge (β=0.668, p<0.001) and attitudes (β=0.668, p<0.001) significantly influenced practices. Additionally, demographic factors, such as monthly household income, type of chronic respiratory disease, educational level and smoking status were significantly associated with variations in KAP scores (all p<0.05).
conclusionsPatients demonstrated poor knowledge, generally positive attitudes, and moderate practices regarding pulmonary rehabilitation. Tailored educational interventions focusing on bridging the knowledge gap and promoting positive behavioural changes are essential for improving pulmonary rehabilitation engagement among chronic respiratory disease patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2400080271.
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.