Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33844637›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2021

Knowledge About COVID-19 Among Adults in China: Cross-sectional Online Survey.

Fengyun Yu, Pascal Geldsetzer, Anne Meierkord, Juntao Yang, Qiushi Chen, Lirui Jiao, Nadeem E Abou-Arraj, An Pan, Chen Wang, Till Bärnighausen and 1 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Did the COVID-19 pandemic change the willingness to pay for an early warning system for infectious diseases in Europe?The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2022
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

Fengyun Yu *Department of Industrial Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-5607-1102
Pascal Geldsetzer *Heidelberg Institute of Global Health, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8878-5505
Anne MeierkordFaculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4056-595X
Juntao YangState Key Laboratory of Medical Molecular Biology, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0003-1180-391X
Qiushi ChenThe Harold and Inge Marcus Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4031-2669
Lirui JiaoReed College, Portland, OR, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2505-7447
Nadeem E Abou-ArrajDepartment of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9055-0318
An PanSchool of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.ORCID 0000-0002-1089-7945
Chen Wang *Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0001-7857-5435
Till Bärnighausen *Heidelberg Institute of Global Health, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4182-4212
Simiao Chen *Heidelberg Institute of Global Health, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0555-2157
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNHeidelberg University · DEHuazhong University of Science and Technology · CNPennsylvania State University · USReed College · USStanford University · USUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA detailed understanding of the public's knowledge and perceptions of COVID-19 could inform governments' public health actions in response to the pandemic.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to determine the knowledge and perceptions of COVID-19 among adults in China and its variation among provinces and by sociodemographic characteristics.

methodsBetween May 8 and June 8, 2020, we conducted a cross-sectional online survey among adults in China who were registered with the private survey company KuRunData. We set a target sample size of 10,000 adults, aiming to sample 300-360 adults from each province in China. Participants were asked 25 questions that tested their knowledge about COVID-19, including measures to prevent infection, common symptoms, and recommended care-seeking behavior. We disaggregated responses by age; sex; education; province; household income; rural-urban residency; and whether or not a participant had a family member, friend, or acquaintance who they know to have been infected with SARS-CoV-2. All analyses used survey sampling weights.

resultsThere were 5079 men and 4921 women who completed the questionnaire and were included in the analysis. Out of 25 knowledge questions, participants answered a mean and median of 21.4 (95% CI 21.3-21.4) and 22 (IQR 20-23) questions correctly, respectively. A total of 83.4% (95% CI 82.7%-84.1%) of participants answered four-fifths or more of the questions correctly. For at least one of four ineffective prevention measures (using a hand dryer, regular nasal irrigation, gargling mouthwash, and taking antibiotics), 68.9% (95% CI 68.0%-69.8%) of participants answered that it was an effective method to prevent a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Although knowledge overall was similar across provinces, the percent of participants who answered the question on recommended care-seeking behavior correctly varied from 47.0% (95% CI 41.4%-52.7%) in Tibet to 87.5% (95% CI 84.1%-91.0%) in Beijing. Within provinces, participants who were male, were middle-aged, were residing in urban areas, and had higher household income tended to answer a higher proportion of the knowledge questions correctly.

conclusionsThis online study of individuals across China suggests that the majority of the population has good knowledge of COVID-19. However, a substantial proportion still holds misconceptions or incorrect beliefs about prevention methods and recommended health care-seeking behaviors, especially in rural areas and some less wealthy provinces in Western China. This study can inform the development of tailored public health policies and promotion campaigns by identifying knowledge areas for which misconceptions are comparatively common and provinces that have relatively low knowledge.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairesAdolescentAdultChinaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth EducationHumansMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsPublic HealthRural PopulationChinaCOVID-19cross-sectionalknowledgeperceptionpublic healthrisksurvey

Identifiers

PMID33844637
PMCPMC8086781
OpenAlexW3152904976

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.