ArticleFuture science OA2025
Knowledge assessment of Tunisian junior doctors in transfusion medicine.
Article in Future science OA, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough transfusion medicine (TM) is included in medical curricula, junior doctors still have gaps in practical knowledge. These gaps with limited training increase patient risks, as well as health care costs. The aim of this study is to assess TM knowledge among juniors' doctors.
methodsThis is a monocentric study, conducted across nine clinical departments. A structured questionnaire was used to assess four TM concepts. Knowledge scores were analyzed according to experience, prior training, and department.
resultsOf the 102 doctors surveyed, 82 (80%) responded. The median age of participants was 27 years old. The percentage of residents was 82%. Among them, 41% had prior and only 10% had more than three years of experience. The average knowledge score was 32.4%, with 41.5% scoring above the mean. Most interns and residents scored in the poor or moderate knowledge range, while the good knowledge group consisted exclusively of residents. Scores were highest for pre-transfusion initiation and monitoring, and lowest for basic knowledge and risk management. Residents generally outperformed interns, with knowledge correlating positively with clinical experience.
conclusionExperience alone does not ensure competency. Enhanced curricula with standardized and innovative tools are recommended to reduce transfusion errors and improve patient safety.
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.