ArticleJournal of infection and public health
Public response to MERS-CoV in the Middle East: iPhone survey in six countries.
Article in Journal of infection and public health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Narrative Review on the Recent Insights Into the Pathogenicity and Potential Role of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) in the Emergence of "Disease X".Health science reports · 2025Article
- Molecular diagnosis and phylogenetic analysis of a Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus human case in Jordan.European journal of public health · 2025Article
- Understanding misinformation infodemic during public health emergencies due to large-scale disease outbreaks: a rapid review.Zeitschrift fur Gesundheitswissenschaften = Journal of public health · 2023Review
- Emerging and Re-emerging Infectious Diseases in the WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region, 2001-2018.International journal of health policy and management · 2022Review
- Public Opinion on European Health Policy, Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Mobile technology: A tool for healthcare and a boon in pandemic.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2022Review
- Human Body Performance with COVID-19 Affectation According to Virus Specification Based on Biosensor Techniques.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- An active inference account of protective behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2021Review
- It won't happen to me! Psychosocial factors influencing risk perception for respiratory infectious diseases: A scoping review.Applied psychology. Health and well-being · 2021Article
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices (KAP) Regarding the COVID-19 Outbreak in Côte d'Ivoire: Understanding the Non-Compliance of Populations with Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Public Response, Anxiety and Behaviour during the First Wave of COVID-19 Pandemic in Saudi Arabia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Health literacy in the general population in the context of epidemic or pandemic coronavirus outbreak situations: Rapid scoping review.Patient education and counseling · 2021Article
- Possibilities, Problems, and Perspectives of Data Collection by Mobile Apps in Longitudinal Epidemiological Studies: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Product of natural evolution (SARS, MERS, and SARS-CoV-2); deadly diseases, from SARS to SARS-CoV-2.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2021Article
- An Overview of Commercially Available Apps in the Initial Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- Attachment, Personality and Locus of Control: Psychological Determinants of Risk Perception and Preventive Behaviors for COVID-19.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Where we missed? Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS-CoV) epidemiology in Saudi Arabia; 2012-2019.The Science of the total environment · 2020Article
- Hand Hygiene Knowledge and Practices among Domestic Hajj Pilgrims: Implications for Future Mass Gatherings Amidst COVID-19.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2020Article
- Public health education for parents during the outbreak of COVID-19: a rapid review.Annals of translational medicine · 2020Article
- A national cross-sectional survey of public perceptions of the COVID-19 pandemic: Self-reported beliefs, knowledge, and behaviors.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries bear the heaviest brunt of MERS-CoV. This study aims to compare public awareness and practice around MERS-CoV across GCC countries. A cross-sectional survey was conducted using the Gulf Indicators (GI) smartphone app among people in the six GCC countries, namely Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, and Oman. A total of 1812 participants recruited. All were aware of MERS-CoV, yet the perception and practice around MERS-CoV varied widely between countries. Over two thirds were either "not concerned" or "slightly concerned" about contracting MERS-CoV; believing that they were under Allah's (God's) protection (40%) was the most cited reason. While 79% were aware that the disease can transmit through droplet from infected person, only 12% stated that MERS-CoV transmits via camels; people in Saudi Arabia were better aware of the transmission. Nevertheless, only 22% of respondents believed that camels are the zoonotic reservoir of MERS-CoV. Those who were concerned about contracting MERS-CoV (aOR: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.2-2.1, p<0.01) and those who thought MERS-CoV to be a severe disease only for those with high-risk conditions (aOR: 1.5, 95% CI: 1.1-2.1, p<0.01) were more likely to believe that camels are the zoonotic source. However, residents of KSA (aOR: 0.03, 95% CI: 0.01-0.07, p<0.01), UAE (aOR: 0.01, 95% CI: 0.004-0.02, p<0.01) and Kuwait (aOR: 0.03, 95% CI: 0.01-0.07, p<0.01) were less likely to believe that camels are the main zoonotic source compared to respondents from the other countries. Hygienic measures were more commonly adopted than avoidance of camels or their raw products, yet there was a discrepancy between the countries. This study highlights that despite being aware of the ongoing MERS-CoV epidemic; many people lack accurate understanding about MERS-CoV transmission, prevention, and are not fully compliant with preventive measures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.