MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record 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 on 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

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPoxvirus research and outbreaks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersKing Saud University
KeywordsMedicinePublic healthFamily medicineHealth careSocial mediaOutbreakDiseasePopulationAnxietyPandemicInfectious disease (medical specialty)Environmental healthCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)NursingPsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from 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.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicPoxvirus research and outbreaksFrench-language works237,207