ArticleJournal of medicine and life2024
Knowledge and attitudes of health science students and medical interns at al Al-Baha University towards epistaxis first aid.
Article in Journal of medicine and life, 2024. 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.
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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Epistaxis, or nosebleeds, is a common medical concern in emergency departments worldwide, often triggered by trauma, infections, allergies, and high blood pressure. Despite its frequency, there is limited research on the knowledge and attitudes of health-related students regarding the first aid management of epistaxis. This study aimed to assess the knowledge and attitudes toward first aid management of epistaxis among health-related specialty students at Al-Baha University, Saudi Arabia. A cross-sectional study was conducted using a self-administered online questionnaire. A total of 370 participants were recruited through convenience sampling. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests to identify significant associations. The findings revealed that over 70% of participants showed strong knowledge in identifying causes of epistaxis and applying first aid, although only 9.6% correctly differentiated between various causes of nosebleeds. Attitudes were highly positive, with 92.1% of respondents supporting training in nosebleed first aid and 85.9% recognizing epistaxis as a health priority. Significant differences in knowledge scores were observed based on age, academic year, and previous training (
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.