COVID-19–Related Knowledge and Practices Among Health Care Workers in Saudi Arabia: Cross-sectional Questionnaire Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health care workers are at the front line against COVID-19. The risk of transmission decreases with adequate knowledge of infection prevention methods. However, health care workers reportedly lack a proper attitude and knowledge of different viral outbreaks. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the knowledge and attitude of health care workers in Saudi Arabia toward COVID-19. Assessment of these parameters may help researchers focus on areas that require improvement. METHODS: A cross-sectional questionnaire study was conducted among 563 participants recruited from multiple cities in Saudi Arabia. An online questionnaire was shared via social media applications, which contained questions to health care workers about general information regarding COVID-19 and standard practices. RESULTS: The mean age of the study population was 30.7 (SD 8) years. Approximately 8.3% (47/563) of the health care workers were isolated as suspected cases of COVID-19, and 0.9% (n=5) were found positive. The majority agreed that social distancing, face masks, and hand washing are effective methods for preventing disease transmission. However, only 63.7% (n=359) knew the correct duration of hand washing. Almost 70% (n=394) strictly adhered to hand hygiene practices, but less than half complied with the practice of wearing a face mask. Significant differences in health care workers' attitudes were observed on the basis of their city of residence, their adherence to COVID-19 practices, and their compliance with the use of a face mask. Among the health care workers, 27.2% (n=153) declared that they will isolate themselves at home and take influenza medication if they experience COVID-19 symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of health care workers in Saudi Arabia presented acceptable levels of general knowledge on COVID-19, but they lack awareness in some crucial details that may prevent disease spread. Intense courses and competency assessments are highly recommended. Prevention of disease progression is the only option for the time being.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".