Frontline Health Workers Knowledge and Preparedness on Novel Influenza H1N1 from Western India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Novel H1N1 has shown a continued presence with recent surges. Information about the knowledge and preparedness of frontline health workers on novel H1N1 is scarcely available. Methodology: The current study was undertaken to assess the knowledge and preparedness of the ASHA and Anganwadi workers from one of the community development blocks of a district in central Gujarat. A cross sectional community based survey was carried out among total 155 frontline workers (93 ASHA and 62 Anganwadi workers) from the block using a self-administered semi-structured questionnaire in vernacular language. Results: Majority of the study participants were in the young age of 26–40 years and were educated up to higher secondary or graduate level. These frontline workers had good knowledge about Novel influenza H1H1 including its symptomatology, mode of transmission and its prevention. Most knew that the disease is curable and preventable. Although they were aware about majority of the interventions, there were gaps in knowledge about importance of hand washing. The primary health center, television and newspapers were the sources of information. Conclusion: The frontline workers possess good knowledge about novel influenza indicating their preparedness to tackle any future surges in the disease transmission.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".