Sickle Cell Disease Management in Primary Health Care Centers, Knowledge, Attitude and Practice among Physicians, Qatif, Eastern Province, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: There are numerous and different types of studies done on the management of Sickle Cell Disease, although they have been made on a hospital basis whether in Saudi Arabia or worldwide, whereas when searching the literature for primary health care centres based, data was limited. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study conducted in Qatif region, Eastern Province, KSA, in the period between May 2019- May-2020. Primary health centers (36 centers) belonging to MOH in Qatif region with approximately 160 physicians were included in this study. Primary health care physicians including general practitioners, family medicine diplomas, and board-certified were surveyed. Other physician’s specialties working in PHC such as radiologists, pediatricians, and dentists were excluded. Total coverage sampling was used with an electronic questionnaire were sent by emails and mobile messaging programs. The dependent variables were PHC physicians’ level of knowledge towards SCD management, attitude towards SCD management, and practices towards SCD management. Results: Out of 111 participants included from PHC Centers in Qatif and Dammam sectors, 44.1 % are males and 55.9 % are females. Most of the participants were 25-35 years old while only 2.7 % were above 55 years old. The participants were selected from Qatif region, based on the inclusion criteria, because SCD is common mainly in Qatif region. About 95.5 % of the participants were Saudis. Conclusion: Although three-quarters of the doctors answered the majority of questions correctly, the level of knowledge is considered inadequate regarding SCD, particularly in aspects of screening and management of SCD patients. Despite the positive attitudes regarding SCD treatment, the majority of doctors were not confident in the effect of treatment on patients’ quality of life. Practices such as referral to the hematologists and prescription of folic acid were the most commonly reported practices.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".