↓ Skip to main content

Knowledge and perception about climate change and human health: findings from a baseline survey among vulnerable communities in Bangladesh

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
154 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Knowledge and perception about climate change and human health: findings from a baseline survey among vulnerable communities in Bangladesh
Published in
BMC Public Health, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-2930-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Md Iqbal Kabir, Md Bayzidur Rahman, Wayne Smith, Mirza Afreen Fatima Lusha, Syed Azim, Abul Hasnat Milton

Abstract

Bangladesh is one of the countries most vulnerable to climate change (CC). A basic understanding of public perception on vulnerability, attitude and the risk in relation to CC and health will provide strategic directions for government policy, adaptation strategies and development of community-based guidelines. The objective of this study was to collect community-based data on peoples' knowledge and perception about CC and its impact on health. In 2012, a cross-sectional survey was undertaken among 6720 households of 224 enumeration areas of rural villages geographically distributed in seven vulnerable districts of Bangladesh, with total population of 19,228,598. Thirty households were selected randomly from each enumeration area using the household listing provided by the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS). Information was collected from all the 6720 research participants using a structured questionnaire. An observation checklist was used by the interviewers to collect household- and community-related information. In addition, we selected the head of each household as the eligible participant for an interview. Evidence of association between sociodemographic variables and knowledge of CC was explored by cross-tabulation and measured using chi-square tests. Logistic regression models were used to further explore the predictors of knowledge. The study revealed that the residents of the rural communities selected for this study largely come from a low socioeconomic background: only 9.6 % had postsecondary education or higher, the majority worked as day labourer or farmer (60 %), and only 10 % earned a monthly income above BDT 12000 (equivalent to US $150 approx.). The majority of the participants (54.2 %) had some knowledge about CC but 45.8 % did not (p < 0.001). The majority of knowledgeable participants (n = 3645) felt excessive temperature as the change of climate (83.2 %). Among all the respondents (n = 6720), 94.5 % perceived change in climate and extreme weather events. Most of them (91.9 %) observed change in rainfall patterns in the last 10 years, and 97.8 % people think their health care expenditure increased after the extreme weather events. Age, educational qualification, monthly income, and occupation were significantly associated with the knowledge about climate change (p < 0.001). People with higher educational level or who live near a school were more knowledgeable about CC and its impact on health. The knowledge level about CC in our study group was average but the perception and awareness of CC related events and its impact on health was high. The most influential factor leading to understanding of CC and its impact on health was education. School-based intervention could be explored to increase peoples' knowledge about CC and necessary health adaptation at community level.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 154 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 154 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 18%
Researcher 16 10%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Lecturer 8 5%
Other 29 19%
Unknown 24 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 32 21%
Social Sciences 20 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 6%
Other 33 21%
Unknown 31 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 July 2017.
All research outputs
#1,864,654
of 11,477,928 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,219
of 7,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,836
of 284,830 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#60
of 211 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,477,928 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,876 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,830 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 211 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.