From knowledge to action: understanding Ghanaian physicians responses to COVID-19 pandemic threats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: This study, conducted with meticulous care, aimed to determine the knowledge, perception, and preparedness of Ghanaian physicians towards a pandemic or another wave of COVID-19. Methods: The study, conducted between May and July 2023, used a robust methodology and included a comprehensive questionnaire. The questionnaire was distributed through Facebook, WhatsApp, and other social media links, ensuring a broad reach and diverse participation. Results: A total of 777 physicians responded, and participation was from all 16 regions of Ghana. Of these, 372 (47.9%) were males, while 405 were females (52.1%). The survey, consisting of 55 questions about COVID-19 knowledge, 29 questions about perception, and 21 questions about preparedness, was designed to capture a comprehensive understanding. The study’s inclusion criteria were limited to physicians who had direct contact with patients in medical facility settings. The findings revealed that Ghanaian physicians ranked high regarding their knowledge of COVID-19. However, their readiness to face another pandemic challenge was observed at 47% in progress. In comparison, 43% of physicians responded as done, with another 10% not being unaware of the current situation about preparedness. Conclusions: In conclusion, this study sheds light on the nuanced responses of Ghanaian physicians to the COVID-19 pandemic threats, emphasizing the critical role of knowledge in shaping their actions. Through a qualitative exploration, we discerned a spectrum of reactions ranging from proactive measures to adaptive strategies in navigating the uncertainties of the crisis. Ghana needs a blueprint for pandemic management.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".