ArticleIranian journal of nursing and midwifery research
Knowledge, Practice, and Misconceptions of Patients with COVID-19: Results from the Isfahan COVID Cohort Study.
Article in Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery research. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Research is scarce on how education and socioeconomic status (SES) affect COVID-19 practices in Iran. This study aims to examine the levels of knowledge, adherence to personal hygiene practices, and prevalence of misconceptions among COVID-19 patients in Isfahan, Iran. Materials and Methods: This study utilized data from the Isfahan COVID Cohort, a longitudinal study of 4328 participants with moderate-to-severe COVID-19. Data collection included demographics, SES, medical history, and knowledge and practice (KP), using a researcher-made questionnaire. SES was assessed via standardized questionnaires, while KP were evaluated through a two-part questionnaire, with scores calculated based on adherence to official guidelines. Statistical analysis involved Results: A total of 4328 patients were enrolled in the study. Regarding COVID-19 knowledge, participants scored 70.59 (16.98) (out of 100). In the pre-COVID practice assessment, the total score was 49.37 (14.13). Post-COVID practice scores were notably high (80.25 (16.91)). There was a significant relationship between practice score and gender, age, marital status, SES, and the presence of underlying disease ( Conclusions: Continuous monitoring is crucial due to the evolving pandemic. Future research must examine these disparities to develop more effective preventive strategies.
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.