SynthesisSystematic reviews2026
Knowledge and attitude toward monkeypox (mpox) among healthcare providers in Sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMpox is an emerging global health threat with increasing frequency and geographic spread recently. Healthcare providers play a pivotal role in outbreak prevention, early detection, isolation, and response. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the pooled prevalence of knowledge and attitude toward Mpox among healthcare providers in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, ScienceDirect, Hinari, and Google Scholar to identify eligible studies published between 2 July 2015 and 2 July 2025. Data were extracted and managed using Microsoft Excel and analyzed using STATA version 17. Pooled prevalence estimates were calculated using a random-effects model. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist. Publication bias was examined using funnel plots and Egger's regression test, and statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I
resultsThis systematic review and meta-analysis included seven studies from Sub-Saharan Africa, comprising a total of 3379 healthcare providers. The pooled prevalence of adequate knowledge and a positive attitude toward Mpox was 40.52% (95% CI, 30.17-50.88) and 51.20% (95% CI, 44.48-57.91), respectively, with high heterogeneity (I
conclusionsThe findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis indicate that knowledge and attitudes toward Mpox among healthcare providers in Sub-Saharan Africa are generally suboptimal. However, these results should be interpreted with caution due to high heterogeneity across studies, the limited number of included studies, and uneven geographic representation. Nonetheless, the findings underscore the need for context-specific capacity-building interventions, including targeted training, improved access to up-to-date clinical guidelines, and enhanced preparedness strategies to support healthcare providers in responding to Mpox and other emerging infectious diseases.
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.