Knowledge, attitudes and practices on substandard and falsified medicines for human and animal use in Wakiso district, Uganda
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Substandard and falsified medicines (SFMs) continue to pose a significant threat to public health globally. However, there is limited evidence on use of SFMs for both humans and animals particularly in low- and middle-income countries such as Uganda. The study assessed knowledge, attitudes and practices on SFMs for human and animal use in Wakiso District, Uganda. Methods: A cross-sectional survey that employed a structured questionnaire among 432 community members was conducted in Wakiso District. The questionnaire assessed knowledge, attitudes and practices on SFMs for human and animal use. Data was collected using the KoboCollect mobile application hosted on tablet computers. Univariate data analysis was conducted in Stata Version 14. Results: The majority of respondents (83%) stated that they had heard about SFMs although only 31% could correctly define them. Only 7% of the respondents accurately identified a falsified medicine despite 24% stating that they believed they could recognise SFMs. Almost two-thirds (62% and 60%) of the respondents disagreed that most human and animal SFMs respectively were as good as genuine medicines. Most of the respondents strongly agreed or agreed that SFMs could be very dangerous for humans (96%) and for animals (95%). Respondents reported having bought products they suspected were SFMs for use in humans (14%) and animals (24%). Seeking health worker advice on the medicine brand (40%) / getting medicine from a trustworthy pharmacy (34%) for humans; and seeking a veterinary officer's advice for choosing the brand (43%) / getting medicine from a trustworthy veterinary pharmacist (29%) for animals were the most common measures respondents reported taking to ensure the medicine bought was genuine. Only 25% of the respondents mentioned informing a health worker and only 4% had reported suspicions of SFMs to the National Drug Authority. Conclusion: Despite commendable attitudes, there was generally limited knowledge and related poor practices regarding SFMs for both humans and animals. There is a need for key stakeholder engagement involving health and regulatory authorities in both human and animal medicine to increase awareness on SFMs to minimise the potential risks to health among the community.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,015 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».