MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785534229 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v10n3p70

Knowledge, Attitude and Practice of Biomedical Waste Management among Health Care Personnel in a Secondary Care Hospital of Al Buraimi Governorate, Sultanate of Oman

2018· article· en· W2785534229 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare and Environmental Waste Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTechnicianFamily medicineBiomedical wasteHealth careStratified samplingInformed consentNursingSimple random sampleTest (biology)Environmental healthAlternative medicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Due to existence of highly infectious materials, the biomedical waste can be a probable source for transmission of diseases as well as occupational hazards among health care workers if not adequately managed. Objective: To assess the knowledge, attitude and practices of biomedical waste management among health care personnel in a secondary hospital of Al Buraimi Governorate, Sultanate Oman.METHODOLOGY: A Cross sectional descriptive self-administered questionnaire based study was conducted among 207 subjects from 30th September 2015 to 30th March 2016 in Al-Buraimi hospital, Oman. Stratified random sampling comprised of four strata (100 nurses, 65 doctors, 22 housekeeping staff and 20 laboratory technicians).Chi-Square test was applied using SPSS version 21 with significance level ≤ 0.05. Confidentiality was maintained with ethical approval from research committee and informed formal consent was taken from the participants. RESULT: Overall response rate was 125 (60.3%) from total 207, mean age 36.14±8.9 and age ranges from 20 to 58 years with mean age (doctors 42.5, nurses 29.8, laboratory technician 29.2 and housekeeping staff 36). Female proportion of 82 (65.6%) was higher as compare to males 43 (34.4%). The study was analyzed on the basis of “satisfactory” and “unsatisfactory” scores using “cut-off point” tools. Nurses had better satisfactory knowledge (90.9%), attitude (94.5%) and practice (80%) scores as compare to other participants. The overall “satisfactory” knowledge, attitude and practice scores were found to be statistically insignificant (P=0.100, P=0.346, P=0.364 respectively). No significant relationship established between dichotomized variables of knowledge and practice (P = 0.264) as well as attitude and practice (P = 0.147).CONCLUSION: The “satisfactory” scores of knowledge, attitude and practice were found to be higher among nurses as compared to other participants, which may be due to intensive patient care and more involvement in biomedical waste management as well as greater responsibility allocated by hospital administration.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.560
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it