MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4306638027 · doi:10.1101/2022.10.17.22281183

Comparison of Monkeypox disease knowledge and perception among the healthcare workers versus the general population during the first month of the WHO emerging infectious disease alert

2022· preprint· en· W4306638027 sur OpenAlexaff
Mohamad‐Hani Temsah, Fadi Aljamaan, Shuliweeh Alenezi, Noura Abouammoh, Khalid Alhasan, Shereen A. Dasuqi, Ali Alhaboob, Mohammed A. Hamad, Rabih Halwani, Abdulkarim Alrabiaah, Sarah Alsubaie, Fatimah Alshahrani, Fahad Alzamil, Ziad A. Memish, Mazin Barry, Jaffar A. Al‐Tawfiq

Notice bibliographique

RevuemedRxiv · 2022
Typepreprint
Langueen
DomaineImmunology and Microbiology
ThématiquePoxvirus research and outbreaks
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Ottawa
Organismes subventionnairesKing Saud University
Mots-clésMedicinePublic healthFamily medicineHealth careSocial mediaOutbreakDiseasePopulationAnxietyPandemicInfectious disease (medical specialty)Environmental healthCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)NursingPsychiatryPathology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background Monkeypox disease (MPD) recently re-emerged in May 2022 and caused international outbreaks in multiple non-endemic countries. This study aimed to assess the Saudi Arabian public and healthcare workers (HCWs) knowledge about MPD and their information-seeking attitudes before any cases were yet reported in Saudi Arabia. Methods This online survey of HCWs and the public in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) was conducted from May 27 to June 5, 2022. The survey tool was adopted from our published research on COVID-19 with modifications related to the new MPD outbreak, which was validated for content, language, and consistency. Participants were invited by convenience sampling techniques through various social media platforms (i.e., Twitter and WhatsApp groups) and email lists. Variables surveyed included participants’ sociodemographic and job-related characteristics, COVID-19 infection status, and advocacy for MPD vaccination. Multiple questions assessing the participants’ knowledge related to MPD and (MPV) in terms of transmission, vaccination information by HCWs, and required isolation precautions. Finally, a Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD7) score was calculated. We then assessed the independent variables associated with participants’ attitudes to seek more information about MPD, and those associated with knowledge scores. Results A total of 1546 participants completed the public survey, and 61.3% showed interest in seeking more information about MPD. Of the participants, 48.7% knew that MPD could be transmitted before skin blisters appear, and 62.7% inferred that skin lesions are infectious. Only 38.1% inferred that touching contaminated surfaces, and 46.5% knew that sexual contact is a mode of transmission. 56.6% falsely believed the old smallpox vaccine is not effective against MPD. Public participants’ overall mean knowledge score of MPD was 4.88 of 9 points. In contrast, the mean score of the knowledge of the 1130 HCWs was 14.4 of 28. Among HCWs, 28.3% correctly answered that the Jynneos vaccine has activity against MPD and 79.7% incorrectly answered that VARIVAX, a chickenpox vaccine, is effective against MPD. In addition, 74.2% of HCWs perceived the need to seek more information about MPD. Male HCWs had significantly lower mean knowledge scores compared to females. Physicians and HCWs’ self-rated high awareness of MPD correlated positively and significantly with their knowledge score. Conclusion In this study, the general public and HCWs had a moderate level of knowledge about MPD. The knowledge gaps among HCWs were evident in the clinical presentation of patients and vaccinations. Both groups reported a desire to seek more information about MPD, but this did not correlate with knowledge scores. It is important to have further education and intensification of campaigns to enhance awareness of MPD. It is also crucial to have further studies evaluate the knowledge of both groups over time.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,015
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,025
Tête enseignante GPT0,322
Écart entre enseignants0,297 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations7
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuemedRxivMême sujetPoxvirus research and outbreaksTravaux en français237 207