Knowledge, Attitude, Practice, and Fear of COVID-19: an Online-Based Cross-cultural Study

  1. Mohammad Ali
  2. Zakir Uddin
  3. Palash Chandra Banik
  4. Fatma A. Hegazy
  5. Shamita Zaman
  6. Abu Saleh Mohammed Ambia
  7. Md. Kaoser Bin Siddique
  8. Rezoana Islam
  9. Fatema Khanam
  10. Sayed Mohammad Bahalul
  11. Md Ahiduzzaman Sharker
  12. FMAkram Hossain
  13. Gias U. Ahsan

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1007/s11469-021-00638-4
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.26.20113233: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: The ethical approval was taken from the Ethics Committee of North South University, Bangladesh (the institutional review board registration number: NSU-IRB-20-013023).
    Consent: Informed consent was taken using the ‘Google Form’ platform before data collection.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variableOur participants include both male and female population aged 16 years and above and willingly took part in the survey.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Data analyses were conducted with SPSS software version 25.0.
    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:
    Limitations of the online survey cannot be ruled out in our study. Due to limited access to the internet, old age and rural people who have been more likely to have poor KAP were not included in the study. Selection bias may be significant if those of poor level KAP people appear to have less participation. In fact, KAP for vulnerable populations deserves special research attention. Moreover, there is a risk of bias due to online data collection. Ethical challenge is a fact in the cross-cultural study (Durham, 2014). However, we have mitigated the challenge for this study by maintaining some measures, such as (1) collecting informed consent before participating in the survey, (2) depersonalizing responders and (3) ensuring confidentiality for better personal security measure like other surveys in public health (Survey to Identify the Public Health Ethics Needs of Public Health Practitioners in Canada: Preliminary Results, n.d.). Despite having those limitations, the cross-cultural nature is the main strength of this study. It’s difficult to compare this study to other similar kinds of studies. To our knowledge, no study measured the cross-cultural value of KAP and fear of COVID-19. Therefore, the result of this study is a novel contribution in the scientific literature. This study imposes a chance to evaluate the relationship between KAP and infection numbers among the population in a different continent. A representative from several professions and all ages made the study m...

    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 10.1101/2020.05.26.20113233v1 on medRxiv