KNOWLEDGE AND RISK PERCEPTION OF NIGERIANS TOWARDS THE CORONAVIRUS DISEASE (COVID-19)

  1. Bolaji Felicia Udomah
  2. Uriel Oludare Ashaolu
  3. Charles Oluwatemitope Olomofe
  4. Olufunke Folasade Dada
  5. Victor Kehinde Soyemi
  6. Yetunde Bolatito Aremu-Kasumu
  7. Chikezie John Ochieze
  8. Ayodele Olusola Adeyemi
  9. Adeyinka Olabisi Owolabi
  10. Martin Chukwudum Igbokwe
  11. Emmanuel Eziashi Ajumuka
  12. Kehinde Williams Ologunde
  13. Gbenga Omotade Popoola
  14. Olumuyiwa Elijah Ariyo
  15. Olaniyi Bamidele Fayemi

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is far from over, although appreciable progress has been made to limit the devastating effects of the pandemic across the globe. Adequate knowledge and risk perception is a critical assessment that is required to ensure proper preventive measures. This study assessed these among Nigerians.

Methods

The study was a cross-sectional assessment of 776 consenting Nigerian adults that were distributed across the 6 geo-political zones and the Federal Capital Territory. Online pre-tested, semi-structured questionnaire were used to obtain the socio-demographic data and assessed the knowledge and risk perception of the participants to COVID-19. The knowledge of COVID-19 was assessed based on the number of accurate responses given in comparison to average scores. Chi-square analysis was computed to analysis the association between socio-demographic characteristics and knowledge of COVID-19 and risk perception. Data analysis was done using SPSS version 21, the level of significance was set at value p<0.05 at 95% confidence interval.

Results

Majority of the participants were male 451 (58.1%), there was a good knowledge of COVID-19 among 90.3% of respondents with 57% having positive risk perception. There was a statistically significant relationship between good knowledge and positive risk perception of COVID-19 (p < 0.001). Annual income (p =0.012) and the perception that “vaccines are good” significantly predict positive risk perception of COVID-19 among the respondents.

Conclusion

A good knowledge of COVID-19 and vaccination against the virus were the two most important factors that determined risk perception among the population. This may be because of the widespread advocacy, and it portends a good omen at combating COVID-19 menace.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.30.21261351: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: Ethical approval was gotten from the health research ethics committee of the Federal Medical Centre Gusau, Zamfara State.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Data was analyzed using SPSS version 21.
    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: Findings may be influenced by selection bias because respondents needed access to a smartphone or computer. This may have excluded the poor, elderly who are most vulnerable to COVID-19 this may limit external validity and may have distorted estimation of those willing to take the vaccine.

    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.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    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.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.07.30.21261351 on medRxiv