ArticleJournal of anesthesia2026
Public awareness of anesthesiologists in Japan: information sources and sex-age differences in a nationwide cross-sectional web survey.
Article in Journal of anesthesia, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePublic understanding of anesthesiologists' expertise and scope of practice remains limited. We examined whether awareness varies by sex-age segments and information sources.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional web survey in Japan (July 2025) using an online panel. Adults aged 20-69 years were eligible; those employed in healthcare/long-term care and those living with a household member in these sectors were excluded. Sex- and age-stratified quota sampling yielded 1,000 respondents. High awareness was defined as recognizing the term "anesthesiologist" and understanding anesthesiologists' main tasks. We also assessed perceived responsibility for anesthesia-related tasks. Sex-stratified multivariable logistic regression estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusting for sociodemographic factors, healthcare experiences, geographic context, and information sources.
resultsOverall, 418/1000 respondents (41.8%) reported high awareness (men 37.2%; women 46.5%), increasing with age. Most selected anesthesiologists as responsible for intraoperative anesthesia (84.7%), whereas fewer did so for procedural sedation/analgesia (37.4%), intensive care (3.4%), or chronic pain management (2.4%). In adjusted models, general interest in health and health literacy were not associated with high awareness. Information sources showed clearer associations: among men, information from friends, family members, or teachers (aOR 3.90; 95% CI 1.69-9.01) and fictional media (aOR 1.96; 95% CI 1.21-3.17) were associated with higher awareness; among women, fictional media remained associated (aOR 1.88; 95% CI 1.20-2.94).
conclusionsIn this survey, fewer than half of adults reported high awareness of anesthesiologists. Awareness was most consistently associated with interpersonal sources and fictional media, suggesting priorities for public communication.
trial registrationUMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000058375). https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000066332.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41779136What 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.