Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37569027›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023

Levels and Predictors of Proactive Practical Experience to Solve COVID-19 among Public Health Officers in Primary Care Units in the Upper Southern Region, Thailand: An Explanatory Mixed Methods Approach.

Suttida Sangpoom, Femi Adesina, Chuthamat Kaewchandee, Kannika Sikanna, Natchima Noppapak, Sarunya Maneerattanasak, Shamarina Shohaimi, Charuai Suwanbamrung

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Suttida SangpoomExcellent Center for Dengue and Community Public Health: EC for DACH, School of Science, Walailak University, Thasala District, Nakhon Si Thammarat 80160, Thailand.
Femi AdesinaDepartment of Biology, Federal University of Technology Akure, Akura 340110, Nigeria.
Chuthamat KaewchandeeCommunity Health Program, Faculty of Liberal Art and Science, Sisaket Rajabhat University, Muang 33000, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-4835-3131
Kannika SikannaSchool of Public Health, Walailak University, Nakhon Si Thammarat 80160, Thailand.
Natchima NoppapakSchool of Public Health, Walailak University, Nakhon Si Thammarat 80160, Thailand.
Sarunya ManeerattanasakDepartment of Immunology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10700, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-0854-7951
Shamarina ShohaimiDepartment of Biology, Faculty of Science, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Seri Kembangan 43400, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0003-0591-6627
Charuai SuwanbamrungMaster and PhD. Program in Public Health Research, Excellent Center for Dengue and Community Public Health: EC for DACH, School of Public Health, Walailak University, Nakhon Si Thammarat 80160, Thailand.
Walailak University · THFederal University of Technology · NGSiriraj Hospital · THSisaket Rajabhat University · THUniversiti Putra Malaysia · MY

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Public Health Officers (PHOs)' experiences in reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic can be based on whether the PHO is active or passive regarding five experience aspects, including knowledge, understanding, opinion, participation, and practice. Therefore, this study's objectives are to identify the types of experiences and analyse the predictors of proactive practical experiences in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic among PHOs in the southern region of Thailand.

methodsAn explanatory mixed methods approach was used to collect data, through questionnaires and online in-depth interviews. This study was conducted from 4 August 2020 to 3 August 2021.

resultsThe results include 60 PHOs from 60 Primary Care Units in six provinces, with 41 (68.3%) females and an average age of 35.57 years (SD = 11.61). The PHOs' knowledge, understanding, and participation experience aspects were mostly proactive rather than passive. The factors that significantly predicted proactive practical experiences included sex (ORadj = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.04-2.21), age (ORadj = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.16-2.48), married status (ORadj = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.16-2.48), education level (ORadj = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.02-2.20), and position for work (ORadj = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.16-2.48). The results of quantitative method were confirmed by 12 sub-themes of 8 PHOs' experiences from qualitative method.

conclusionsThe PHOs' knowledge, understanding, opinion, and participation experiences were significant predictors of practical experience. Primary health care systems should promote proactive experiences in all four aspects to increase proactive practical experiences.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultFemaleHumansMalePandemicsPrimary Health CarePublic HealthThailandCOVID-19 solutionexperiencemixed methods approachprimary care unitpublic health officerThailand

Identifiers

PMID37569027
PMCPMC10419067
OpenAlexW4385417066

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.