Global epidemiology of COVID-19 knowledge, attitude and practice: a systematic review and meta-analysis

ObjectiveTo assess the knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) of the global general population regarding COVID-19.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO were used to identify articles published between 1 January and 30 June 2021 assessing KAP regarding...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:BMJ open 2021-09, Vol.11 (9), p.e051447-e051447
Main Authors: Siddiquea, Bodrun Naher, Shetty, Aishwarya, Bhattacharya, Oashe, Afroz, Afsana, Billah, Baki
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aged
Attitudes
Coronaviruses
COVID-19
COVID-19 vaccines
Disease prevention
Disease transmission
Epidemiology
Fatalities
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
Humans
infection control
Infectious diseases
Knowledge
Male
Medical personnel
Meta-analysis
Pandemics
Population
Public health
SARS-CoV-2
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2
Social distancing
Supply chains
Surveys and Questionnaires
Systematic review
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:ObjectiveTo assess the knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) of the global general population regarding COVID-19.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO were used to identify articles published between 1 January and 30 June 2021 assessing KAP regarding COVID-19 in the global general population. The quality of eligible studies was assessed. Random effects model was used to obtain the pooled proportion of each component of KAP of COVID-19. Heterogeneity (I2) was tested, and subgroup and correlation analyses were performed.ResultsOut of 3099 records, 84 studies from 45 countries across all continents assessing 215 731 participants’ COVID-19 KAP were included in this study. The estimated overall correct answers for knowledge, good attitude and good practice in this review were 75% (95% CI 72% to 77%), 74% (95% CI 71% to 77%) and 70% (95% CI 66% to 74%), respectively. Low-income countries, men, people aged below 30 years and people with 12 years of education or less had the lowest practice scores. Practice scores were below 60% in Africa and Europe/Oceania. Overall heterogeneity was high (I2 ≥98%), and publication bias was present (Egger’s regression test, p
ISSN:2044-6055
2044-6055
DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051447