A Comparative Study to Assess the Prevalence of Myths Related to Covid-19 with a View to Develop and Disseminate Informational Booklet among adults residing in selected Rural and Urban areas of District Mohali, Punjab
Diksha Rana, Sonali, Ritu Chaudhary
1Lecturer M.Sc.(N) (Medical Surgical Nursing),
2Assistant Professor, M.Sc.(N) Obsteterics and Gynaecology
3M.Sc.(N) Child Health Nursing
*Corresponding Author E-mail: diksha1996rana@gmail.com
ABSTRACT:
Myth is commonly considered as a Folklore. Myths related to Covid-19 have been prevalent from time to time and it take long time to demystify the existing myths by providing realistic evidence-based approach. This study aims to assess the prevalence of myths related to COVID-19 with a view to develop and disseminate informational booklet among adults residing in selected rural and urban areas of district Mohali, Punjab. A quantitative research approach with comparative research design was adopted. By convenient sampling technique, 100 rural and 100 urban adults were selected. A self-structured questionnaire was developed to assess the prevalence of myths related to COVID-19. The result of the study showed that in rural areas 83% of adults were having moderate level of myth, 12% of adults having low level of myth, 5% adults were having high level of myth. In urban areas 91% of adults were having low level of myth, 8% of adults having no myth, 1% adults were having moderate level of myth. On comparison shows that there is a significant difference in the prevalence of myths related to COVID-19 among adults residing in rural and urban areas. The calculated unpaired t test was found to be higher than the tabulated value (t1000 =1.962) at 0.05 level of significance which depicts that there is difference between the prevalence of myths among adults residing in rural and urban areas is true difference and not by chance. Age, education level, working status, Previous history of COVID -19, Family status has impact on prevalence of myths related to COVID -19.
KEYWORDS: Prevalence, Myths, COVID-19, Adults.
INTRODUCTION:
Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19), also known as the corona virus, or COVID, is a contagious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The corona virus is crown like in structure it belongs to Corona Viridae family. The World Health Organization declared a public health emergency of international concern regarding COVID-19 on 30 January 2020, and later declared a pandemic on 11 March 20201.
At least one third of people who are infected do not develop noticeable symptoms. Of those people who develop noticeable symptoms enough to be classed as patients, most (81%) develop mild to moderate symptoms (up to mild pneumonia), while 14% develop severe symptoms (dyspnea, hypoxia, or more than 50% lung involvement on imaging), and 5% suffer critical symptoms (respiratory failure, shock, or multiorgan dysfunction). Older people are at a higher risk of developing severe symptoms.2
With such an accelerated increase in Covid-19 cases, widespread myths and misconceptions with regards to the transmission of Covid-19 also sparked an ‘infodemic’ according to the World Health Organization (WHO). Myths emerge with disease outbreaks and Covid-19 proved to be no different. Myths may refer to ideas and concepts believed or held by a group of people, which are not scientifically validated. Identifying myths and misconceptions is crucial in disease outbreak, since these might affect preventive and containment measures. Myths can be present in different levels of a community. Some people believed that wearing a surgical mask is most effective, and eating from a Chinese restaurant is highly risky to acquire the virus.3
A cross sectional study was conducted in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, A total of 1436 responses was analyzed with 43.5% males and 56.5% females. Respondents from the healthcare sector presented statistically higher scores than those in non-healthcare sectors (p<0.001). Higher education and higher salary were important predictors of better COVID-19 knowledge and recorded a misconception rate of 66.9%.4
A study was conducted in Nigeria, out of which 83% of participants of a study held at least on several myths related to COVID-19 at which they believed that the virus originated in the laboratory. Accordingly, myths have consequences on the short- and long-term control efforts against the disease, and it is one of the health hazards in the prevention from COVID- 19.5
PROBLEM STATEMENT:
A comparative study to assess the prevalence of myths related to COVID-19 with a view to develop and disseminate informational booklet among adults residing in selected rural and urban areas of district Mohali, Punjab.
OBJECTIVES:
1. To assess the prevalence of myths related to COVID-19 among adults residing in rural areas.
2. To assess the prevalence of myths related to COVID -19 among adults residing in urban areas.
3. To develop and disseminate informational booklet on myths related to COVID-19.
4. To compare the prevalence of myths related to COVID -19 among adults residing in rural and urban areas.
5. To associate the findings with socio-demographic variables.
METHODOLOGY:
Research Approach:
Quantitative Research Approach was considered appropriate to assess the prevalence of myths related to COVID-19.
Research Design:
Comparative Research Design
Research Setting:
The study was conducted in selected rural and urban areas of district Mohali, Punjab. The pilot study was conducted in Chajju Majra (rural) and Dasmesh Nagar (urban). The main study was conducted at BalloMajra (rural) and Janta Nagar (urban). The reason for selecting the areas was availability of subjects, investigators convenience, and expected cooperation from the people.
Target population:
The target population of the study comprise of adults in the age group of 18 – 60 years, who fulfils the inclusion criteria.
Sample and sampling technique:
Total 200 adults are selected 100 from rural area and 100 from urban area. Convenient Random sampling was used.
Description of tools:
The tool planned for data collection consists of two sections:
Section A: Socio-demographic variables:
The section consists of 8 items related to Socio demographic variables such as Age, Gender Education Level, Occupation, Religion, Previous History of COVID-19, Type of family, Currently working in Health sector.
Section B: Self structured tool to assess the prevalence of myths related to COVID-19:
This section consists of 30 questions or myths related to COVID-19 and it is answered on 2-point scale (Yes, NO) and is administered to adults.
Scoring criteria:
|
S. No. |
Level of Myth |
Range of scores |
|
1. |
High level of Myths |
21-30 |
|
2. |
Moderate level of Myths |
11-20 |
|
3. |
Low level of Myths |
01-10 |
|
4. |
No Myths |
00 |
Validity of tool:
The content validity of the tool was determined by expert’s opinion on the relevance of the items. The experts were requested to check the items for relevance, clarity and appropriateness of the content. The modifications were done based on experts’ suggestions and consultation with the guide and final tool was reframed.
Reliability of tool:
The reliability of tool has been estimated by Split-half method using Cronbach’s alpha correlation formula which has been found to be 0.914 for self-structured tool to assess the prevalence of myths related to COVID-19.
Permission:
A formal permission was obtained from Village Sarpanch (rural) and SDM Kharar (urban) of district Mohali, Punjab after discussing the purpose and objectives of study with them. The selected areas are Chajju Majra, Ballo Majra, Dasmesh Nagar and Janta Nagar
Procedure of data collection:
The main study was conducted in the month of April at BalloMajra (rural) and Janta Nagar (urban). Written consent from participants was taken after explaining the purpose and objectives of the study. They were also assured about their confidentiality. Using Convenient Random sampling 100 participants were selected from rural area and 100 are selected from urban area. Self-structured tool to assess the prevalence of myths were administered and subjects are asked to fill their responses.
RESULT:
Table: 1 Frequency and percentage distribution among adults according to their socio demographic variables.
|
S. No |
Socio Demographic Variable |
RURAL (nR=100) |
URBAN (nU =100) |
Chi-Square Value, df |
|
Frequency (%) |
Frequency (%) |
|||
|
1. |
Age (in years) |
|
||
|
20-30 years |
12 (12%) |
36 (36%) |
7.30 3, NS |
|
|
31-40 years |
49 (49%) |
33(33%) |
||
|
41-50 years |
30(30%) |
17 (17%) |
||
|
51-60 years |
9(9%) |
14 (14%) |
||
|
2. |
Gender |
|
||
|
Male |
53 (53%) |
57(57%) |
1.37 2, NS |
|
|
Female |
47(47%) |
43(43%) |
||
|
Other |
0 (0%) |
0(0%) |
||
|
3. |
Education level |
|
||
|
Up-to primary level |
15 (15%) |
0 (0%) |
16.04 2, * |
|
|
Up-to Secondary level |
79 (79%) |
28 (28%) |
||
|
Graduate or above |
6 (6%) |
72 (72%) |
||
|
4. |
Working status |
|
||
|
Non – Working |
51 (51%) |
38 (38%) |
0.38 1, NS |
|
|
Working |
49 (49%) |
62 (62%) |
||
|
5. |
Religion |
|
||
|
Hindu |
42 (42%) |
43 (43%) |
1.96 3, NS |
|
|
Muslim |
23 (23%) |
14 (14%) |
||
|
Sikh |
35 (35%) |
36 (36%) |
||
|
Christian |
0 (0%) |
7 (7%) |
||
|
6. |
Previous history of COVID-19 |
|
||
|
No |
96 (96%) |
76 (76%) |
0.12 1, NS |
|
|
Yes |
4 (4%) |
24 (24%) |
||
|
7. |
Type of family |
|
||
|
Nuclear family |
23 (23%) |
31 (31%) |
0.78 1, NS |
|
|
Joint family |
77 (77%) |
69 (69%) |
||
|
8. |
Currently working in health sector |
|
||
|
Yes |
0 (0%) |
11 (11%) |
0.42 1, NS |
|
|
No |
100 (100%) |
89 (89%) |
||
NS =Non significant, * =Significant at <0.05 level of significance
Table 2: Frequency and percentage distribution related to prevalence of myths related to COVID-19 among adults residing in rural areas.
|
Sr. No. |
Level of Myth |
Range of Scores |
Frequency |
Percentage % |
|
1 |
No myths |
0-0 |
0 |
0% |
|
2 |
Low level of Myth |
01-10 |
12 |
12% |
|
3 |
Moderate level of Myth |
11-20 |
83 |
83% |
|
4 |
High Level of Myth |
21-30 |
5 |
5% |
Table 3: Frequency and percentage distribution related to prevalence of myths related to COVID-19 among adults residing in urban areas.
|
Sr. No. |
Level of Myth |
Range of Scores |
Frequency |
Percentage % |
|
1 |
No myth |
0-0 |
8 |
8% |
|
2 |
Low level of Myth |
01-10 |
91 |
91% |
|
3 |
Moderate level of Myth |
11-20 |
1 |
1% |
|
4 |
High Level of Myth |
21-30 |
0 |
0% |
Table 4: Findings related to comparison the prevalence of myths related to COVID -19 among adults residing in rural and urban areas.
N=200
|
Area |
Mean |
S. D |
Unpaired t test |
Df |
|
Rural |
14.39 |
3.268 |
7.574 |
198 |
|
Urban |
4.01 |
2.698 |
*Significant at p <0.05
Table 5: Association between findings related to prevalence of myths related to COVID-19 among adults residing in rural and urban areas with selected socio demographic variables. N = 200
|
S. No |
Socio Demographic Variable |
Rural |
Urban |
||||||
|
n |
Mean |
SD |
n |
Mean |
SD |
||||
|
1. |
Age in years |
||||||||
|
20-30 years |
12 |
12.416 |
3.476 |
36 |
4.194 |
14.945 |
|||
|
31-40 years |
49 |
13.734 |
3.127 |
33 |
3.575 |
2.915 |
|||
|
41-50 years |
30 |
15.866 |
2.894 |
17 |
3.647 |
2.206 |
|||
|
51-60 years |
9 |
15.444 |
2.962 |
14 |
4.714 |
2.584 |
|||
|
|
df = 99, F test = 4.907584 * |
df =93, f test =4.191335* |
|||||||
|
2. |
Gender |
||||||||
|
Male |
53 |
14.113 |
3.355 |
57 |
6.964 |
2.713 |
|||
|
Female |
47 |
14.774 |
3.219 |
43 |
8.674 |
2.779 |
|||
|
Other |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|||
|
|
df = 96, F test = 0.308275, NS |
df=99 , F test=0.001802, NS |
|||||||
|
3. |
Education level |
||||||||
|
Up-to primary level |
15 |
16.133 |
2.875 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|||
|
Up-to Secondary level |
79 |
14.291 |
2.996 |
28 |
14.107 |
2.719 |
|||
|
Graduate or above |
6 |
10.333 |
19.754 |
72 |
5.444 |
2.732 |
|||
|
|
|
df =99, F test=9.793063 * |
df=99, F test=9.430405* |
||||||
|
4. |
Working status |
||||||||
|
Non – Working |
51 |
28.215 |
3.301 |
38 |
10.447 |
2.713 |
|||
|
Working |
49 |
28.775 |
3.221 |
62 |
5.596 |
2.696 |
|||
|
|
|
df=98, t test= 2.453368 * |
df=98, t test=4.102373 * |
||||||
|
5. |
Religion |
||||||||
|
Hindu |
42 |
33.904 |
3.284 |
43 |
8.558 |
2.702 |
|||
|
Muslim |
23 |
53.043 |
3.216 |
14 |
27.785 |
2.740 |
|||
|
Sikh |
35 |
40.828 |
3.255 |
36 |
10.388 |
2.766 |
|||
|
Christian |
0 |
0 |
0 |
7 |
73.815 |
52.285 |
|||
|
|
|
df=99, F test= 0.559846, NS |
df=99, F test=1.998475, NS |
||||||
|
6. |
Previous history of COVID-19 |
||||||||
|
No |
96 |
14.989 |
3.268 |
38 |
10.394 |
2.719 |
|||
|
Yes |
4 |
228.5 |
3.104 |
62 |
6.370 |
2.719 |
|||
|
|
df=98, t test=3.387628 *
|
df=97, t test=2.122752 *
|
|||||||
|
7. |
Type of Family |
||||||||
|
Nuclear family |
23 |
39.695 |
3.364 |
31 |
11.19 |
2.688 |
|||
|
Joint family |
77 |
3.268 |
18.688 |
69 |
5.681 |
2.732 |
|||
|
|
df=98, t test=0.00217, NS |
df=98, t test=-0.18417, NS |
|||||||
|
8.
|
Currently working in health sector |
||||||||
|
Yes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
11 |
19.090 |
2.911 |
|||
|
No |
100 |
14.39 |
3.268 |
89 |
4.460 |
2.713 |
|||
|
|
df=101, t test=-7.58864, NS |
df=98, t test=-4.09437,NS |
|||||||
NS =Non significant, * =Significant at <0.05 level of significance
NURSING IMPLICATIONS:
· Nursing education should focus on teaching the student nurses regarding prevalent myths related to COVID-19 and its safety measures so that they are able to provide knowledge to community.
· The community health nursing curriculum need to be strengthened and should include more content regarding prevalent myths related to COVID-19 and its safety measures.
· Nursing personnel need to be equipped with adequate knowledge to conduct mass health education programme regarding prevalent myths related to COVID-19 and its safety measures.
· Health promotion without the active involvement of community cannot bring about required knowledge and change in behavior towards prevalent myths related to COVID-19 and its safety measures.
Nursing Administration:
· Nurse as an administrator can organize awareness camps prevalent myths related to COVID-19 and its safety measures
· Workshops regarding prevalent myths related to COVID-19 and its safety measures can be arranged among staff nurses.
Nursing Research:
· Nurses need to be engaged in all phases of research process. This study provides the baseline to inspire other investigator for carrying out further studies to prevent prevailing myths of COVID-19 and its safety measures.
· The present study can be the source of review of literature for future researchers.
CONCLUSION:
From the findings, present study concluded that: The study findings revealed the that the mean prevalence of myths of adults residing in rural and urban areas are (14.39±3.268) and (4.01±2.698) respectively.
REFERENCES:
1. Colavizza G. COVID-19 research in Wikipedia. Quantitative Science Studies. 2020 May 12:1-32.
2. Bokde V, Kharbikar HL, Roy ML, Joshi P, Ga A. Possible impacts of COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown on education sector in India. Food Sci. Rep. 2020:1-7.
3. Misbah, S, Ahmad, A, Butt, MH, et al. A systematic analysis of studies on corona virus disease 19 (COVID-19) from viral emergence to treatment. J Coll Physicians Surg Pakistan. 2020; 30(6): 9-18.
4. Schmidt T, Cloete A, Davids A, Makola L, Zondi N, Jantjies M. Myths, misconceptions, othering and stigmatizing responses to Covid-19 in South Africa: A rapid qualitative assessment. PloS one. 2020 Dec 22; 15(12): e0244420.
5. Mekonnen HS, Azagew AW, Wubneh CA, Belay GM, Assimamaw NT, Agegnehu CD, Azale T, Azene ZN, Merid MW, Muluneh AG, Geberu DM. Community’s misconception about COVID-19 and its associated factors among Gondar town residents, Northwest Ethiopia. Tropical Medicine and Health. 2020 Dec; 48(1): 1-9
|
Received on 30.04.2025 Revised on 23.05.2025 Accepted on 12.06.2025 Published on 18.08.2025 Available online from August 30, 2025 A and V Pub Int. J. of Nursing and Med. Res. 2025;4(3):145-149. DOI: 10.52711/ijnmr.2025.27 ©A and V Publications All right reserved
|
|
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Creative Commons License. |
|