DOI 10.1016/j.ijtb.2023.08.008
An insight from National Family Health Surveys on changing trends in prevalence and knowledge regarding T.B. in India.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/
OBJECTIVES
Addressing gaps in knowledge about T.B. is a vital component of T.B.'s elimination to achieve the End T.B. strategy by 2025 in India. The present study compares the correct knowledge regarding T.B. by analysis of the nationally-representative secondary data of NFHS-4 (2015-16) and NFHS-5 (2019-20) data in India.
METHODS
NFHS-4 and NFHS-5 secondary data on eleven T.B.-related questions analysis was done after seeking permission to use datasets from the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) program-sociodemographic details and Responses exported and analysed using M.S. Excel. Descriptive variables were represented as frequency and percentages. Z tests for proportions were used to compare and determine differences between NFHS-4 and NFHS-5 knowledge. Statistical significance was set at a p-value of <0.05.
RESULTS
The correct knowledge regarding T.B. significantly rose from 457,399 (56.3%) in NFHS-4 to 507,517 (61.4%) in NFHS-5. However, a significant increase in incorrect knowledge about the other modes of transmission of T.B. and T.B. courtesy stigma in households from 95,985 (13.4%) in 2015-16 to 113,978 (14.9%) in 2019-20 was observed.
CONCLUSIONS
The correct knowledge of T.B. has significantly increased from NFHS-4 (2015-16) to NFHS-5 (2019-20). However, there is a significant increase in incorrect knowledge regarding the modes of transmission and stigmatising attitudes towards T.B. through improvement in the communication efforts in the National T.B. Elimination Programme (NTEP).
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.