Understanding Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices on Ebola Virus Disease: A Multi-Site Mixed Methods Survey on Preparedness in Rwanda
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract The overall goal of this survey was to understand the Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) - related knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) at individual, inter-personal, institutional, and societal levels in Rwanda. This cross-sectional mixed-methods survey was conducted in five selected districts: Rusizi, Karongi, Rubavu, Burera and Gasabo. Quantitative data was collected from 1,010 participants using a structured questionnaire and Kobo Collect. Qualitative data was collected from 98 participants through Key Informant Interviews and Focus Group Discussions using a semi structured interview guide. Among the 1,010 surveyed respondents, 56% were male, 70.3% were married, and 50% had primary education. An important finding was the high level of Ebola awareness and knowledge in all the five districts, with 99.6% reporting having previously heard of Ebola, which indicates previous awareness-raising efforts were successful. More than 54% of respondents indicated that Ebola is caused by a virus which originates from wild animal animals (42.1%). Furthermore, fever (85%), bleeding (87.7), and vomiting (40.2%) were cited as the primary signs and symptoms for Ebola. Most of the respondents were knowledgeable regarding prevention measures for Ebola. Despite this, 80% of the survey respondents had not received formal training or health education on Ebola. The majority of respondents (78.2%) reported having a positive attitude towards EVD survivors. Many respondents (90%) believe that the country is at risk of an EVD outbreak and about 87.8% think that they are personally at risk of contracting Ebola. Most respondents reported adopting habits that included avoiding physical contact with the patients and reducing unnecessary movements/travel throughout the Ebola-affected regions. At the community level, participants state that they participate in the sharing of Ebola-related information and reporting suspected cases to relevant authorities. Additionally, many participants know the necessary emergency contact number (114) for assistance and reporting of EVD-related information. Most respondents (97.2%) believed that it is important to be vaccinated to prevent Ebola, and around 93.3% are ready/willing to be vaccinated once the EVD vaccine is available. While the radio is the preferred source for Ebola-related information, the most trusted sources are the ministry of health and governmental institutions, such as the Rwanda Biomedical Centre. Our results show that there was high EVD-related knowledge and awareness among the general population in Rwanda. However, for strong public health awareness, preparedness, and protection, there is a need to implement public sensitization programmes that address EVD-related misconceptions and discriminatory attitudes toward EVD patients.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».