Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33606744›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2021

Knowledge, attitude and practice towards COVID-19 among health professionals in Ethiopia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Eyasu Alem Lake, Birhanu Wondimeneh Demissie, Natneal Atnafu Gebeyehu, Addisu Yeshambel Wassie, Kelemu Abebe Gelaw, Gedion Asnake Azeze

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Eyasu Alem LakeDepartment of Nursing, College of Health Science and Medicine, Wolaita Sodo University, Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia.ORCID 0000-0002-2894-8018
Birhanu Wondimeneh DemissieDepartment of Nursing, College of Health Science and Medicine, Wolaita Sodo University, Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia.
Natneal Atnafu GebeyehuDepartment of Midwifery, College of Health Science and Medicine, Wolaita Sodo University, Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia.
Addisu Yeshambel WassieDepartment of Midwifery, College of Health Science and Medicine, Wolaita Sodo University, Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia.
Kelemu Abebe GelawDepartment of Midwifery, College of Health Science and Medicine, Wolaita Sodo University, Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia.
Gedion Asnake AzezeDepartment of Midwifery, College of Health Science and Medicine, Wolaita Sodo University, Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe World Health Organization (WHO) declared coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) a global pandemic on 11th March, 2020. In Ethiopia, more than 90,490 and 1,300 confirmed cases and deaths were reported by the Federal Ministry of Health at the time of writing up this project. As health care providers are frontline workers managing the COVID-19 pandemic, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the pooled level of knowledge, attitude, and practice towards COVID-19 among health professionals in Ethiopia.

methodsPubMed, Google Scholar, Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE), Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and African Journal of Online (AJOL) were searched. The data were extracted using Microsoft Excel and analyzed using STATA version 14. Publication bias was checked by funnel plot and more objectively through Egger's regression test, with P < 0.05 considered to indicate potential publication bias. The heterogeneity of studies was checked using I2 statistics. Pooled analysis was conducted using a weighted inverse variance random-effects model. Subgroup analysis was done related to geographic region and time. A leave-one-out sensitivity analysis was also employed.

resultA total of 11 studies with 3,843 study participants for knowledge, eight studies with 2,842 study participants for attitude and 10 studies with 3, 435 study participants for practice were used to estimate the pooled level of good knowledge, positive attitude and poor practice among health professionals. The overall estimated good level of knowledge, positive attitude and poor practice towards COVID-19 was found to be 79.4% (95% CI: 73.5%-85.2%; I2 = 96%), 73.7% (95%CI: 63.09%-84.4%; I2 = 98.3%) and 40.3% (95%CI: 31.1%-49.6%; I2 = 97.1%) respectively.

conclusionStudy findings showed that there were significant gaps in COVID-19 related knowledge, attitude and practice with respect to World Health Organization recommendations on COVID-19 management and personal protection practices. This study therefore recommends that institutions provide with immediate effect accurate and up-to-date information on COVID-19 and training that encourages improved knowledge, attitude and practice to mitigate this pandemic.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelCOVID-19Health PersonnelKnowledgeSARS-CoV-2EthiopiaHumansPandemics

Identifiers

PMID33606744
PMCPMC7894858

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.