ArticleScientific reports2025
Knowledge of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus among healthcare professionals.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Randomised controlled trials and iNPH.Fluids and barriers of the CNS · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) is a prevalent, yet greatly underdiagnosed condition in older adults, which can cause significant disability if left untreated. Reduced knowledge among healthcare professionals could contribute to the existing mismatch between the prevalence and treatment rates of iNPH. This study aimed to determine the level of knowledge on iNPH amongst healthcare professionals working in Neurology, Neurosurgery, Geriatrics and other relevant acute services, as well as primary and community care. A cross-sectional study, based on retrospectively extracted data from questionnaires about key aspects of iNPH, was completed as part of iNPH educational sessions to healthcare professionals, between November-2022 and January-2024. Frequency distribution of answers was explored using descriptive statistics. Factors affecting the likelihood of giving a correct response were analysed using multiple logistic regression. The resulting sample included 274 healthcare professionals (81.8% females, median[IQR] 7[3-13] years' experience). There were varied, often low, levels of knowledge about iNPH. Correct answers ranged from 78.5% professionals acknowledging that iNPH can be treated surgically with a cerebrospinal-fluid shunt, to 16.8% correctly stating that iNPH can present with one or more of the symptoms' triad. Respondent's profession was found to be significantly related to answers. With some variation by profession, this study highlights concerningly low levels of knowledge on iNPH among healthcare professionals who may encounter patients with this condition in their daily practice. This could be improved with targeted, low-cost education and training, that could have a significant impact in improving the currently low treatment rates of this disabling condition.
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.