ArticleJournal of microbiology & biology education2023
COVID-19 Scientific Literacy in Medical and Nursing Students.
Article in Journal of microbiology & biology education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strategies to Enhance Health Communication Participation Among Medical Students in Chinese Universities: A Cross-Sectional Study.Advances in medical education and practice · 2025Article
- Developing scientific literacy with a cyclic independent study assisted CURE detecting SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2023Article
- Developing Science Literacy in Students and Society: Theory, Research, and Practice.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2023Article
- Evaluating the Sensitivity, Specificity, and Accuracy of ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, Bing AI, and Bard Against Conventional Drug-Drug Interactions Clinical Tools.Drug, healthcare and patient safety · 2023Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The pandemic brought a whole newfound collection of words into our everyday language, some of which had been terms that were infrequently used outside academic and medical settings. However, as familiar as this new pandemic vocabulary has become, there are still several terms that often get mixed in everyday conversations, media communications, and even in the medical field. Some of these terms are often mistaken, which may lead to issues in the understanding of important concepts. Science communication, as a facet of scientific literacy, intends to educate people in an easy-to-understand manner, and this communication is even more important in health care, when a literate patient's medical decisions depend frequently on this process. In this article, we explore the use and misuse of some of the most common terms utilized during the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic by nursing and medical students, i.e., future health care professionals, in the hospital environment. This single-center hospital-based cross-sectional study, performed throughout September 2022, included 30 medical and nursing students. All participants completed a self-administered 15-item anonymous questionnaire at a single time point. Nine multiple-choice questions evaluated knowledge, diagnosis, disease manifestations, and vaccines related to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. Six questions provided demographics and quality assessment information. The analysis of the answers indicated that for at least 75% of the population surveyed, COVID-19 literacy was better for terms related to technology and actions (3/5 questions answered correctly) than for terms related to the disease (1/4 questions answered correctly). The overall median score for questions 1 to 9 was 4.5 of 9 points in total. Based on the results, the language used in the questionnaire was considered easy to understand, with an easy to medium level of complexity, and the perceived time required to complete the questionnaire was less than 5 min. In conclusion, our results showed that efforts need to be made in continuous professional education to increase the knowledge in COVID-19 literacy in the health care environment for medical and nursing students. Larger studies are recommended to identify and to fulfill the challenges that COVID-19 brought to medical and nursing education.
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.