ArticleBMC health services research2025
Understanding healthcare workers' risk perception and response to healthcare waste in Arba Minch town, Ethiopia: application of the extended parallel process model.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRisk perception involves subjective judgments about risk. The mismanagement of healthcare waste puts people and the environment at significant risk, including more than two million healthcare workers. Despite this, there are no studies in Ethiopia on the risk perception of health workers, and none studies globally have utilized a risk model in this context.
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the risk perception of healthcare waste and its associated factors among healthcare workers in public hospitals in Arba Minch, South Ethiopia, in 2024 using extended parallel process model.
methodsAn institutional-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 270 health workers. A structured self-administered questionnaire was used to collect the data, which was then exported to SPSS version 26. T-test and ANOVA tests were conducted to compare the mean differences in perceptions among respondents’ characteristics and among attitudinal response (efficacy by threat interaction), while correlation analysis was used to assess the relationships among perceptions. Binary logistic regression was employed to identify significant factors affecting healthcare waste risk perception, using a p-value of 0.05 with a 95% confidence interval. The final model’s fitness was checked using the Hosmer and Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test.
resultOne hundred three respondents (39.5%) were classified as no-response, followed by 62 (23.6%) who were Responsive, 66 (25.3%) who were Proactive respondents, and 30 (11.6%) who were categorized as fear Control respondents. The danger-controlling response for healthcare workers (HCWs) was 108 (41.4%). Perceived self-efficacy was the lowest perception among HCWs (median = 55). Midwife respondents had lower odds (AOR: 0.132, CI: 0.039–0.44) of controlling the danger associated with HCW risks, while receiving a message from training (AOR: 3.17, CI: 1.052–9.59) moreover, having good knowledge (AOR: 3.46, CI: 1.49–8.02) increased odds of controlling danger of HCW risks.
conclusionsThe study revealed a low healthcare waste risk perception processing. The type of Profession, source of message, and level of knowledge were significantly associated with danger control response to HCW hazards. Training that incorporates both threat and efficacy messaging based on Risk Behavior Diagnosis scale assessment is recommended.
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.