Assessment of Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice on Laboratory among Healthcare Workers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The use of chemicals in laboratories exposes laboratory staff to risks arising from hazardous chemicals. Accidents related to poor management and handling of chemicals have been reported in laboratories. Good implementation of occupational safety and health (OSH) in organizations that have implemented OSH-Management System (OSH-MS) plays an important role in reducing accidents at the workplace. This study aims: to assess the level of knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) related to the OSH aspect in chemical handling among healthcare workers. Method: This is a cross-sectional survey involving laboratory workers. The study was conducted in two governmental hospital laboratories in Riyadh (AL Zulfi Hospital, and King Khaled Hospital) Saudi Arabia. A total of 120 laboratory staff were recruited and data on KAP was collected using self- administered questionnaires. Items in the questionnaire were adapted from previous studies and published guidelines. Data obtained were entered into statistical software for analysis. Results: approximately two-thirds of the respondents have high knowledge of OSH, 96% have a positive attitude and 84% have good practice on OSH. Moreover, the present study revealed that there was no significant difference in the knowledge level between laboratory workers. Similarly, there is no significant difference in the attitude level between laboratory workers. However, the tests show that there is a significant difference in the practice level between laboratory workers. Furthermore, the results of this study showed evidence of the association between gender (0.049) and practice level; the association between age (0.011*) and knowledge level, and education level (p=0.003) and knowledge level. Conclusion: There were the implementation of a suitable, adequate, and effective management system that is continually improved is crucial and needs to be implemented to manage the OSH risks in the organizations.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".