Knowledge about COVID-19 and beliefs about and use of herbal products during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in Saudi Arabia

  1. Hamad S. Alyami
  2. Mohamed A.A. Orabi
  3. Fahad M. Aldhabbah
  4. Hamad N. Alturki
  5. Wejdan I. Aburas
  6. Abdulrahman I. Alfayez
  7. Abdullah S. Alharbi
  8. Rawan A. Almasuood
  9. Njood A. Alsuhaibani

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1016/j.jsps.2020.08.023
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.23.20138107: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementConsent: All participants voluntarily participated in the study and were thus considered exempt from written informed consent.
    IRB: As participation in the study was voluntary, the research ethics committee approved the consent waiver.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analysis: Data were analysed using SPSS software, version 25 (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY, USA).
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    However, there are some limitations. The study design itself, a cross-sectional survey design, limited our ability to identify causality between study variables. There are limited studies that have evaluated individuals’ knowledge about the COVID-19 pandemic and the use of herbal products and food supplements worldwide and in the Middle East specifically, which limited our ability to compare our findings with Arabic-speaking countries of a similar socioeconomic level and culture. Additionally, the use of an online survey for data collection might have excluded some vulnerable populations who could not be reached and we may have missed some of the targeted population. Finally, we were not able to estimate the response rate for our questionnaire study.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.06.23.20138107v1 on medRxiv