Abstract
Dengue fever cases are on the rise in Thailand with increases in flooding events. Studies pertaining to public knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of dengue prevention have frequently been used to better understand the publics’ needs towards dengue. This study conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of past dengue KAP studies in Thailand. Criteria were developed to determine eligibility, and reviewers independently applied these criteria to identify the 9 eligible studies for the systematic review and the 3 eligible studies for the meta-analysis. Results suggest that the majority of the studies included in the systematic review reported overall low knowledge levels towards dengue prevention in Thailand. This finding was affirmed by the meta-analysis, which concluded that the overall estimate of the proportion of participants with high knowledge of dengue prevention is only 35% (95% CI: 14%-59%). Most of the studies included in the systematic review reported positive attitudes towards dengue prevention, and this finding was also affirmed by the meta-analysis, which concluded that the pooled estimate of the proportion of positive attitudes towards dengue prevention is 61% (95% CI: 43%-77%). Lastly, the majority of studies in the systematic review reported overall poor practices towards dengue prevention. Similarly, the meta-analysis found that the pooled estimate of the proportion of good practices for preventing dengue infection is only 25% (95% CI: 22%-27%).
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data sharing does not apply to this research since no datasets were generated.
