Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34299943›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Development and Validation of a Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices Questionnaire on COVID-19 (KAP COVID-19).

Da-In Park

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Systematic Nutritional Clinical Assessment (SyNCA): Instrument Development, Delphi Protocol for Content, and Semantic Validation.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

1 author.

Da-In ParkDepartment of Nursing, College of Life Science and Nano Technology, Hannam University, Daejeon 306-791, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-4738-5046

Funding

Hannam University 2020 Hannam University Research Fund
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given its highly contagious nature and an absence of a specific antiviral agent to this date, the key to controlling the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and decreasing the infection rate is adherence to preventive measures. It is essential to understand an individual's knowledge, attitudes and practices toward COVID-19 since public adherence to health guidelines relies heavily on these aspects. However, there is no validated instrument that evaluates knowledge, attitudes and practices toward COVID-19. Thus, this study aimed to develop and validate such tool. A questionnaire was developed based on international and national guidelines and a review of the literature. Initial items were evaluated by 10 experts to determine content validity. Exploratory factor analysis and reliability testing were conducted with a convenience sample of 229 nursing students. Based on the content, face validity and factor analysis, 34 items were selected. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin value of 0.735 indicated a highly acceptable score with a significant Bartlett's test of sphericity (

Indexed as

COVID-19Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansReproducibility of ResultsSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairesattitudesCOVID-19instrument development and validationknowledgepractice

Identifiers

PMID34299943
PMCPMC8303280

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.