PLoS ONE

PLoS One. 11(7): e0159139

Community Willingness to Participate in a Dengue Study in Aceh Province, Indonesia

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7630-8413Harapan Harapan¹²³⁴*, Samsul Anwar⁵, Aslam Bustaman⁶, Arsil Radiansyah¹, Pradiba Angraini¹, Riny Fasli¹, Salwiyadi Salwiyadi¹, Reza Akbar Bastian¹, Ade Oktiviyari¹, Imaduddin Akmal¹, Muhammad Iqbalamin¹, Jamalul Adil¹, Fenni Henrizal¹, Darmayanti Darmayanti¹, Rovy Pratama¹, Jonny Karunia Fajar¹, Abdul Malik Setiawan⁷, Allison Imrie⁴, Ulrich Kuch⁸, David Alexander Groneberg⁸, R. Tedjo Sasmono⁹, Meghnath Dhimal¹⁰, Ruth Müller⁸

Bruce S Cushing, Editor

1. Medical Research Unit, School of Medicine, Syiah Kuala University, Banda Aceh, Indonesia

2. Tropical Disease Centre, School of Medicine, Syiah Kuala University, Banda Aceh, Indonesia

3. Department of Microbiology, School of Medicine, Syiah Kuala University, Banda Aceh, Indonesia

4. School of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia

5. Department of Statistics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Syiah Kuala University, Banda Aceh, Indonesia

6. Department of Biology, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Syiah Kuala University, Banda Aceh, Indonesia

7. Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, State Islamic University Maulana Malik Ibrahim, Malang, Indonesia

8. Institute of Occupational Medicine, Social Medicine and Environmental Medicine, Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

9. Eijkman Institute for Molecular Biology, Jakarta, Indonesia

10. Nepal Health Research Council (NHRC), Ministry of Health Complex, Kathmandu, Nepal

University of Texas at El Paso, UNITED STATES

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Conceived and designed the experiments: HH. Performed the experiments: AB AR PA RF SS RAB AO IA MI JA FH DD RP JKF. Analyzed the data: HH SA AMS. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: MD SA. Wrote the paper: HH AI UK DAG RTS MD RM.

* E-mail: harapan@unsyiah.ac.id

© 2016 Harapan et al

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159139

Published online: 12 July 2016

Abstract

Background

Dengue virus infection is the most rapidly spreading vector-borne disease in the world. Essential research on dengue virus transmission and its prevention requires community participation. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the factors that are associated with the willingness of communities in high prevalence areas to participate in dengue research. The aim of this study was to explore factors associated with the willingness of healthy community members in Aceh province, Indonesia, to participate in dengue research that would require phlebotomy.

Methodology/Principal Findings

A community-based cross-sectional study was carried out in nine regencies and municipalities of Aceh from November 2014 to March 2015. Interviews using a set of validated questionnaires were conducted to collect data on demography, history of dengue infection, socioeconomic status, and knowledge, attitude and practice regarding dengue fever. Two-step logistic regression and Spearman’s rank correlation (rs) analysis were used to assess the influence of independent variables on dependent variables. Among 535 participants, less than 20% had a good willingness to participate in the dengue study. The factors associated with good willingness to participate were being female, working as a civil servant, private employee or entrepreneur, having a high socioeconomic status and good knowledge, attitude and practice regarding dengue. Good knowledge and attitude regarding dengue were positive independent predictors of willingness to participate (OR: 2.30 [95% CI: 1.36–3.90] and 3.73 [95% CI: 2.24–6.21], respectively).

Conclusion/Significance

The willingness to participate in dengue research is very low among community members in Aceh, and the two most important associated factors are knowledge and attitude regarding dengue. To increase participation rate, efforts to improve the knowledge and attitude of community members regarding dengue fever and dengue-related research is required before such studies are launched.

Introduction

Dengue fever is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality especially among children, in several Asian and Latin American countries and has globally gained in epidemiological importance in recent decades [1] with estimates of annual dengue infections as high as 390 million and 128 countries reporting cases [2]. Community participation is vital for success in dengue control, dengue prevention and dengue research [3]. Initiatives prevention program in Latin Americas such as the integrated management strategy for dengue prevention and control (IMS-Dengue) and integrated vector management (IVM) required community participation [3]. A community based environmental management with community participation embedded in a routine control programme was effective as indicated by a significant reduction of dengue vectors in some regions [4,5]. Research on dengue also requires community participation in many ways. For example, active school absence based surveillance in Thailand [6,7] and school-based versus community-surveillance program in Peru [8] were completed because an adequate community participation. In addition, projects such as the establishment of biobanks, genetic and molecular epidemiology studies and dengue vaccine trials all depend on adequate numbers of participants. However, the recruitment may not be a trivial task. The difficulty in recruiting participants in clinical study is well documented [9–11] and this has resulted in cost increases, study completion and implementation delays, and statistical inconclusiveness [9–14]. Although general support of medical research seems high, less than half of individuals are willing to donate blood when a specific request for donation and storage is made [15].

Willingness to participate (WTP) surveys measure the willingness of research participants to take part in a particular study and the associated factors [16]. The WTP surveys have been conducted in various setting either in actual [17–20] or in hypothetical condition [18,21] and for non-infectious [20,22–25] or infectious diseases [21,26–29]. However, most of those studies did not require phlebotomy. A study found that the WTP rate in genetic research among patients after with myocardial infarction varied greatly between 24 US hospitals, from 40% to 100% [23]. In addition, another study found that public WTP to donate the blood for long-term storage and genetic research was 42% out of 3,130 research participants [30]. A study in South Korea found that only 25% of the research participants were willing to participate in clinical trials [31].

One factor that influences the WTP is the ethnic background of the participants. Studies found that African-Americans and White Americans differ in their WTP in medical research [19,32–34]. African-Americans were less likely to give a blood sample compared with White Americans [19,23,35]. Chinese participants were also less likely to donate blood for genetic research compared to non-Chinese participants [36]. A systematic review of ten clinical intervention studies revealed that Hispanics had a statistically significant higher WTP than non-Hispanic whites [37]. In addition, it is well accepted that motivations for research participation vary between participants of different cultural backgrounds [38,39]. Therefore an effort have been made to identify the factors that promote and hinder the WTP in clinical research among participants in the particular heritage [40]. As far to our best knowledge there is no study conducted in Indonesia to assess the WTP in particular in the dengue research setting.

Up to now, WTP has only very rarely been assessed for research on dengue. The only record we found, from Puerto Rico, assessed the interest to participate in a dengue vaccine efficacy trial [28] and revealed that barriers for participating in a vaccine trial included lack of information on dengue vaccine candidates, lack of trust in new vaccines and trial procedures, and fear of infection or other side effects.

In Indonesia, a dengue hyper-endemic country, all four dengue virus serotypes circulate in at least 433 regencies or municipalities (84.7%) and more than 200 million people are at risk of infection [41]. A recent nationwide study found that over half of children have been infected by the age of 5 [42]. The incidence of dengue fever has rapidly increased from 0.05 in 1968 to approximately 39.80 per 100,000 population in 2014 [41,43]. It is estimated that 30 million dengue infections occur in Indonesia annually [2] with approximately 1% case-fatality rate [44]. In Aceh, one of the high-prevalence provinces, there were 2,208 registered dengue cases in 2014 (46.6 per 100,000 population) [41]. In the wake of coordinated dengue prevention programmes planned for this province, this study aimed to determine the factors that influence WTP in dengue research that would require phlebotomy procedures among participating healthy community members.

Material and Methods

Study site and design

The cross-sectional study was conducted in nine regencies or municipalities of Aceh province, Indonesia (Aceh Besar, Aceh Selatan, Aceh Singkil, Aceh Tamiang, Aceh Tengah, Aceh Timur, Aceh Utara, Langsa and Sabang), from November 2014 to March 2015. Validated questionnaires from previous studies [45–48] were used in interviewing participants. The questionnaires covered demographic data and the history of dengue virus infection among participants and their family member(s), socioeconomic status (SES), and knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) regarding dengue. Prior to use in the actual study, the questionnaires were tested for reliability among 30 participants in two regencies (Aceh Barat Daya and Aceh Pidie Jaya). Cronbach’s alpha 0.7 was used as the minimal cut-off for good internal consistency [49,50]. In addition, the normality of the data was analysed with the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test [51].

To represent the total population of Aceh (4,791,924 people in 2014) [52], 385 participants were required as the minimum sample size based on the assumption that 50% of the participants had a good WTP with a 5% margin of error and 95% confidence level [53]. The recruitment of participants was conducted using a stratified random sampling procedure. Nine out of 23 regencies and municipalities in Aceh were randomly drawn and participants were selected from these nine areas using judgmental sampling procedure. Higher numbers of participants were recruited from regencies with higher population numbers. Inclusion criteria were (1) healthy inhabitant, (2) age more than 16 years, (3) at least three months of residence in the current location, and (4) ability to communicate in Bahasa Indonesia.

Measures

Dependent variable

The dependent variable consisted of behavioral intention as defined by WTP in a dengue study that requires phlebotomy. To ascertain WTP in the dengue study, participants were asked about their willingness to take part and to allow their family member to take part in a dengue study that requires phlebotomy and donation of 2.5 ml of their blood on the premise that they are infected with dengue virus. Each question had five possible answers in a Likert-like scale indicating agreement. The scoring for the Likert-like scale was: 5 = Very likely, 4 = Likely, 3 = Undecided, 2 = Unlikely; and 1 = Very unlikely. Higher scores reflected better WTP in the dengue study.

Independent variables

Demographic data of the participants including age, gender, educational attainment, type of occupation, religion, marital status, monthly income and type of residence were collected. Age was measured by date of birth and then converted into actual age. Education indicated the highest level of formal education completed. Occupation type was divided into five types including farmer, civil servant (working in the government sector), private employee (working in the private sector), entrepreneur (working as traders in traditional markets or owning small-scale businesses) and student or university student. Monthly income, the average of the money earned each month, was measured by asking the participants to choose the closest amount of money from a list. Type of residence was divided into rural and suburban areas. The history of dengue infection and having family member(s) who had suffered from dengue fever were collected based on participants’ recollections.

The socioeconomic status (SES) of participants was measured using an asset index based on Principal Component Analysis (PCA) [47]. The asset index was constructed based on the ownership of fifteen indicator assets and calculated as the sum of standardized asset scores multiplied by their respective factor loadings as proposed previously [48,54]. The quintiles of the asset index were calculated and the participants classified into 1st (poorest) to 5th quintile (least poor). The details indicator assets used are available in S1 Table.

To measure the knowledge of participants regarding the signs and symptoms of dengue fever and the transmission of dengue virus, 28 questions were adapted from previous studies [45,46]. Each correct answer from the possible responses (“yes” or “no”) was given a score of one, and incorrect answers were scored zero. There was no “do not know” option. To measure their attitude, participants were asked to respond to 15 questions from previous studies [45,46,48] on a five-point Likert-like scale indicating their agreement from ‘‘5 = strongly agree” to ‘‘1 = strongly disagree”. To assess preventive practices including the prevention of mosquito-man contact and elimination of mosquito breeding sites, 16 questions were adapted from previous studies [45,46]. Correct answers were given a score of one and incorrect ones, zero. Thus, higher KAP domain scores indicate better knowledge regarding dengue, more positive attitudes and better preventive practice. Details of questionnaires used for assessing KAP regarding dengue fever are available in S2 Table.

Statistical analysis

The assessment of WTP and KAP domains was executed using a scoring system. The additive scale score ranged from 2 to 10 for the WTP and from 0 to 28, 15 to 75 and 0 to 16, respectively, for the three KAP domains. For each participant, scores for each question within the domain were summed up to obtain a single value. To assess the effect of independent variables on the dependent variable, two-step logistic regression analysis was used. For this, WTP and KAP were defined as”good” or”poor” based on an 80% cut-off point. In the first step, all independent variables were included in univariate logistic regression analysis. In the second step, since this study was exploratory in nature, all explanatory variables that were associated with WTP with a P-value ≤ 0.25 in the univariate analysis were entered into the multivariate logistic regression analysis [46,55]. The estimated odds ratio (OR) was interpreted in relation to one of the categories designated as the reference category. Confounding factors were explored by observing the difference between the crude OR from univariate analyses and the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) in multivariate analyses as proposed previously [46].

Additional analyses were conducted to assess correlations between WTP and some independent variables in the ratio scale data (SES and KAP scores) using Spearman’s rank correlation (rs). Spearman’s rank correlation was chosen because our data were not normally distributed as revealed by the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. The confidence intervals for rs were calculated as described previously [56]. All analyses were performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software (SPSS for Windows, Version 15, Chicago, USA).

Ethical approval

The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the School of Medicine, Syiah Kuala University, Banda Aceh, Indonesia. The aims, risks, and benefits of the study were explained to each participant, and they were asked to sign a consent form prior to enrolment in the study. Participants were also informed that they could quit at any time during the interview session. After informed consent was obtained, the interviewers conducted the structured interviews. Participation in this study was voluntary and no incentive was given.

Results

Participant characteristics

In this study, 535 healthy community members from nine regencies and municipalities of Aceh province were surveyed. Their characteristics are summarized in Table 1. The average age of participants was 30.8 (17–70) years. The majority (66.9%) were living in suburban areas. No participant was illiterate. More than a third (38.7%) had completed senior high school (12 years) and approximately a fifth (27.9%) had a university degree. Half of the respondents earned less than 1 million Indonesian Rupiah (US $ 81) per month. Although only one-tenth of the participants declared having personally experienced dengue fever, one-fifth declared that family members had previously suffered from dengue fever. In addition, this study found that more than 60% of participants had poor knowledge regarding dengue and approximately 70% had poor attitude to dengue and poor preventive practices against dengue.

See full table Table 1. Characteristics of participants and univariate logistic regression analysis showing predictors of willingness to participate (WTP) in a dengue study (good vs. poor) (n = 535).

Willingness to participate in dengue study and associated factors

Only 102 participants (19.1%) had a good WTP in the proposed dengue study. Univariate logistic regression analysis revealed that being female, working as a civil servant, private employee, entrepreneur or student/university student, having high SES, and good KAP domains were associated with good WTP (P < 0.05) (Table 1). Neither age group, education, religion, marital status, monthly income, types of residence nor previous personal or family experience with dengue fever were associated with WTP in dengue research.

Being female increased the odds of having a good WTP approximately twice. Compared to farmers, the odds of having a good WTP increased if the participants were working as civil servants (OR: 2.84; 95% CI: 1.11–7.23), private employees (OR: 3.91; 95% CI: 1.48–10.35) or entrepreneurs (OR: 3.44; 95% CI: 1.25–8.57). Participants grouped in the richest quintile had increased odds of having a good WTP compared to the poorest quintile (OR: 2.71; 95% CI: 1.04–4.35). As expected, the odds of having a good WTP were increased among participants who had good KAP domains (OR: 3.36 [95% CI: 2.15–5.24], 6.07 [3.83–9.63], 1.72 [1.72–2.70]). However, multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that only knowledge and attitude towards dengue were independent predictors of WTP (OR: 2.30 [95% CI: 1.36–3.90] and 3.73 [2.24–6.21], respectively) (Table 2).

See full table Table 2. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showing predictors of willingness to participate (WTP) in dengue study (good vs. poor) (n = 535).

Analysis with Spearman’s rank correlation confirmed that there was a weak association between SES and WTP (rs = 0.09, P = 0.032) (Table 3). Spearman’s rank correlation analysis also confirmed that the strongest predictor associated with WTP in dengue research were attitude and knowledge regarding dengue with rs = 0.49 and rs = 0.19, respectively (P < 0.001), while preventive practice against dengue had a weak association (rs = 0.13).

See full table Table 3. Correlation between willingness to participate (WTP) in dengue research, socioeconomic status and knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) regarding dengue (n = 535).

Discussion

The recruitment of participants for medical research is complex and challenging [14,57,58], especially when studies are interventional or involve invasive sampling methods. Inability to recruit required numbers of participants within a defined geographical setting or timeframe may delay study completion and incur additional costs, or result in statistically inconclusive outcomes [12–14]. For example, a study found that only 31% out of 114 UK trials funded by two UK funding agencies (Medical Research Council and Health Technology Assessment) achieved original recruited target and 45% recruited <80% of their target and 53% of trials required an extension [14]. One of the reasons was fewer patients agreeing to participate than expected [14]. In contrast, there are studies that have been and continue to be successful in gaining the support and participation of the community in research on dengue for example active school absence–based surveillance for dengue in Thailand [6], hospital-based participation in Hawaii [59] and school-based versus community-surveillance program in Peru [8].

Several factors including site-specific dengue epidemiology and cultural characteristics of the study population are important for community participation [8]. Understanding the factors that are correlated with the WTP of a particular population is thus essential before one sets out to conduct research that requires the participation of the members of that community. The main aim of this study was to explore the extent of community support for dengue research in Aceh, Indonesia. This support was measured by participants’ stated WTP in dengue research that would involve donating 2.5 ml of their blood and allowing their family member(s) to do the same if infected with dengue virus. The findings reported here have both practical and public policy implications. From a practical perspective, they can be used to address modifiable factors that are correlated with poor WTP in order to increase participation. From a policy perspective, public participation in dengue research is important because it facilitates the evidence-based decision-making process and public acceptance of health policy derived there from. This can only be achieved if community members are willing to participate in research.

This is the first study conducted to specifically explore WTP in dengue research in Indonesia and its related factors. The first study regarding WTP in dengue-related research anywhere was reported from Puerto Rico where WTP in a dengue vaccine efficacy trial had been assessed [28]. Basically, the concept of our study is similar to those on willingness to donate a blood sample for genetic research. Therefore, the results can also be compared with those from such studies [18,20,23,35,36,40,60,61].

Our study revealed that the percentage of participants with good WTP in dengue research was very low, less than 20%. This willingness rate is much lower than those reported from European and North American countries (60 to more than 90%) [18]. However, these comparisons should be interpreted with caution because the willingness rate represents the percentage of respondents who had good WTP. The good WTP in the present study, however, is defined as a cumulative WTP rate between the willingness of the participants to donate their own blood and their willingness to allow their family member(s) to do the same if participants or their family member(s) suffered from dengue infection. In addition, “undecided” participants in our study were also classified as “poor WTP” because a cut-off point of 80% had been set. In Asian countries, Singapore for example, approximately only 50% of participants were willing to donate blood samples for genetic research [36]. Nationwide survey in South Korea found that 25% of the participants were willing to participate in clinical trials [31]. This may be an indication of differences in race, ethnicity or culture in the study participants [32–34,62].

In general the factors associated with WTP in dengue research were sex, occupation, SES, and KAP domains. The univariate analysis found increasing odds of being willing to participate in dengue research if participants were female, working as civil servant, private employee or entrepreneur, had high SES or good KAP domains. While in multivariate analysis revealed that only knowledge and attitude towards dengue were the independent predictors of WTP. The observed high WTP in dengue research among women may be associated with more pronounced altruism of women compared to men in Indonesia [63]. It is well known that altruism is one of the most important factors for WTP in a medical research study [40,64–67]. A previous study also found that male was associated with high refusal in a genetic study that required phlebotomy in US [20]. Interestingly, studies consistency found that gender had no association with WTP toward blood donation and storage for genetic research in US [30,68,69], Sweden [70] and in Singapore [36]. A study found that male however had higher WTP in cancer genetics research in US [71]. These inconsistency findings explain, in part, why gender was not a robust independent factor in the present study.

As expected, good knowledge and attitude regarding dengue were identified as positive predictors of WTP in dengue research. Our previous study revealed that there was a strong association between good attitudes regarding dengue and good preventive practices against dengue, and that there was a good translation of attitudes into preventive practice in Aceh [72]. Therefore, the high rate of WTP among participants who had a good attitude regarding dengue might reflect their efforts for dengue prevention. In addition, it has been reported that participants who have a high level of understanding (good knowledge) regarding a medical study are more likely to have a positive attitude towards participation in a medical study [73]. A study in South Korea found that good perception and high awareness concerning medical research were identified as positive predictors of WTP in medical research [31]. Our study revealed that good attitude regarding dengue was the strongest factor for good WTP. Similarly, a study on willingness to donate an organ found a significant positive correlation with attitude [74]. Studies found that good attitude toward genetic research [70] and donation and storage of blood specimens for genetic research [30] had strong association with high willingness to donate a blood sample for research in Sweden and US, respectively. In Singapore, attitude characteristic was also associated with willingness to donate blood for genetic study [36]. In addition, a good attitude toward clinical trials had strong association with WTP in medical research [31]. Furthermore, it has been well known that the lack of knowledge and awareness about medical study is a significant barrier to participate in medical study [31,75]. Altogether, this underscores that knowledge and attitude of participants are the cornerstones for their successful recruitment to a medical study. Therefore, higher enrolment rates could be achieved through positively changing individual knowledge and attitude toward dengue fever and also attitude toward participation dengue research studies such as a targeted educational approaches using an educational video [29].

It was expected that the experience of participants or their families with dengue fever would serve to increase a perception of one’s own vulnerability and therefore willingness to participate in research on the topic. For example, a study showed that knowing someone who suffered from a particular illness was a very strong motivator for participation in related medical research, stronger even than a personal history of that illness [16]. In addition, the history of genetic disease had strong correlation with the willingness to donate a blood sample in Sweden [70]. However, our study revealed that having a family member with a history of dengue fever or a personal history of dengue fever did not increase the WTP in dengue research. A similar finding was found from a couple studies in US [20] and Singapore [36] that family history of the disease had no association with willingness to donate blood for genetic research. A possible explanation from our previous study is that participants in Aceh who had personally suffered from dengue fever had no significantly better knowledge regarding dengue fever [72].

Surprisingly, in this study, formal education level was not associated with WTP in dengue research. A previous study also found that education was not an important factor for willingness to participate in medical research in USA [16] and or to donate blood for genetic research in some Singapore [36], US [20,35,68], and Sweden [70]. Furthermore, study also found that there was no association between education and WTP to participate in vaccine clinical trial in Asian countries such as China [29], India [21] and South Korean population [31]. One of the possible reasons is that, although formal education is associated with knowledge regarding dengue, it was not associated with attitude to dengue [72]. However, other studies did find that formal education was correlated with WTP in medical research [76,77].

Limitations of this study include that WTP is only a behavioral intention and therefore may not reflect or predict actual enrolment. Participants might be more likely to answer positively about WTP due to a cultural tendency to exhibit pleasing behavior. Second, WTP in dengue research may depend on factors other than demography and KAP regarding dengue. Therefore, factors not measured in this study (e.g., financial incentive, trust, altruism) could affect actual participation rates. Third, this study was unable to assess psychological barriers that might affect WTP in dengue research.

To increase the WTP in dengue or other medical research, various strategies can be used. First, efforts to increase the knowledge and attitude of community members regarding dengue and basic information related to a specific medical study are necessary. In addition, it is important to implement pre-consent education [78] during the enrolment of participants to enhance pre-existing knowledge and improve WTP. Second, (financial) incentives should be considered for increasing participation rates because this is a robust motivator for WTP [67]. In Singapore, healthcare-related incentives like free medical check-ups seemed more preferred than money [36]. In Indonesia, based on our dengue serosurveillance study (unpublished), we found that the participation was highly increased when incentives were offered. Therefore, an offer of incentives should be considered in dengue research study recruitment. Third, training for recruiters is also important and should include how to frame the study information in a positive way. Finally, if possible, the dengue research should be embedded in a government program because more community members may participate if the research is conducted by the government compared to other parties [36].

Conclusion

This study found that the willingness to participate in dengue research was very low among community members in Aceh. The two most important associated factors are the knowledge and attitude of participants regarding dengue. Therefore, efforts to increase the knowledge and attitude regarding dengue in the communities prior to conducting dengue-related research may be critical for achieving sufficient participation rates.

Supplementary Material

Open In Web Browser

Acknowledgments

We thank the participants of this study, Dr. Mudatsir (Microbiology Department, School of Medicine, Syiah Kuala University) for assisting in ethical application processes, and Panji Fortuna Hadisoemarto (Department of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Padjadjaran University) for providing the SES questionnaire.

Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of Public Library of Science

PMC Copyright Notice

The articles available from the PMC site are protected by copyright, even though access is free. Copyright is held by the respective authors or publishers who provide these articles to PMC. Users of PMC are responsible for complying with the terms and conditions defined by the copyright holder.

Users should assume that standard copyright protection applies to articles in PMC, unless an article contains an explicit license statement that gives a user additional reuse or redistribution rights. PMC does not allow automated/bulk downloading of articles that have standard copyright protection.

See the copyright notice on the PMC site, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/about/copyright/, for further details and specific exceptions.

References

WHO (2016) Dengue and severe dengue. In: Organization WH, editor. Geneva: World Health Organization.

Bhatt S, Gething PW, Brady OJ, Messina JP, Farlow AW, Moyes CL, et al (2013) The global distribution and burden of dengue. Nature 496: 504–507. doi: 10.1038/nature12060 23563266

Tapia-Conyer R, Mendez-Galvan J, Burciaga-Zuniga P (2012) Community participation in the prevention and control of dengue: the patio limpio strategy in Mexico. Paediatr Int Child Health 32: 10–13. doi: 10.1179/2046904712Z.00000000047 22668443

Vanlerberghe V, Toledo ME, Rodriguez M, Gomez D, Baly A, Benitez JR, et al (2009) Community involvement in dengue vector control: cluster randomised trial. BMJ 338: b1959 doi: 10.1136/bmj.b1959 19509031

Caprara A, Lima JWD, Peixoto ACR, Motta CMV, Nobre JMS, Sommerfeld J, et al (2015) Entomological impact and social participation in dengue control: a cluster randomized trial in Fortaleza, Brazil. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 109: 99–105. doi: 10.1093/trstmh/tru187 25604760

Mammen MP, Pimgate C, Koenraadt CJ, Rothman AL, Aldstadt J, Nisalak A, et al (2008) Spatial and temporal clustering of dengue virus transmission in Thai villages. PLoS Med 5: e205 doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0050205 18986209

Yoon IK, Rothman AL, Tannitisupawong D, Srikiatkhachorn A, Jarman RG, Aldstadt J, et al (2012) Underrecognized mildly symptomatic viremic dengue virus infections in rural Thai schools and villages. J Infect Dis 206: 389–398. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jis357 22615312

Rocha C, Morrison AC, Forshey BM, Blair PJ, Olson JG, Stancil JD, et al (2009) Comparison of two active surveillance programs for the detection of clinical dengue cases in Iquitos, Peru. Am J Trop Med Hyg 80: 656–660. 19346395

Caldwell PHY, Butow PN, Craig JC (2003) Parents' attitudes to children's participation in randomized controlled trials. J Pediatr 142: 554–559. 12756389

Costenbader KH, Brome D, Blanch D, Gall V, Karlson E, Liang MH (2007) Factors determining participation in prevention trials among systemic lupus erythematosus patients: a qualitative study. Arthritis Rheum 57: 49–55. 17266094

Dias L, Schoenfeld E, Thomas J, Baldwin C, McLeod J, Smith J, et al (2005) Reasons for high retention in pediatric clinical trials: comparison of participant and staff responses in the Correction of Myopia Evaluation Trial. Clinical Trials 2: 443–452. 16317812

Bower P, Wallace P, Ward E, Graffy J, Miller J, Delaney B, et al (2009) Improving recruitment to health research in primary care. Fam Pract 26: 391–337. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmp037 19549623

Clark MA, Neighbors CJ, Wasserman MR, Armstrong GF, Drnach ML, Howie SL, et al (2007) Strategies and cost of recruitment of middle-aged and older unmarried women in a cancer screening study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 16: 2605–2614. 18086764

McDonald AM, Knight RC, Campbell MK, Entwistle VA, Grant AM, Cook JA, et al (2006) What influences recruitment to randomised controlled trials? A review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies. Trials 7: 9 16603070

Wang S, Fridinger F, Sheedy KA, Linnan H, Khoury MJ (1999) Public attitudes regarding the donation and storage of blood specimens for genetic research. American Journal of Human Genetics 65: A411–A411.

Trauth J, Musa D, Siminoff L (2000) Public attitudes regarding willingness to participate in medical research studies. J Health Soc Policy 12: 23–43. 11184441

Hemachandra A, Puls RL, Kerr SJ, Saengthong N, Pussadee K, Emery S, et al (2009) Willingness to participate in actual preventive HIV vaccine phase I/IIa trial in Bangkok, Thailand. Retrovirology 6 (Suppl 3): P202.

Johnsson L, Helgesson G, Rafnar T, Halldorsdottir I, Chia KS, Eriksson S, et al (2010) Hypothetical and factual willingness to participate in biobank research. European Journal of Human Genetics 18: 1261–1264. doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2010.106 20648060

Bussey-Jones J, Garrett J, Henderson G, Moloney M, Blumenthal C, Corbie-Smith G (2010) The role of race and trust in tissue/blood donation for genetic research. Genetics in Medicine 12: 116–121. doi: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181cd6689 20098329

Green D, Cushman M, Dermond N, Johnson EA, Castro C, Arnett D, et al (2006) Obtaining informed consent for genetic studies: the multiethnic study of atherosclerosis. Am J Epidemiol 164: 845–851. 16928727

Newman PA, Chakrapani V, Weaver J, Shunmugam M, Rubincam C (2014) Willingness to participate in HIV vaccine trials among men who have sex with men in Chennai and Mumbai, India. Vaccine 32: 5854–5861. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.08.043 25173475

James DCS, Harville C, Whitehead N, Stellefson M, Dodani S, Sears C (2016) Willingness of African American women to participate in e-Health/m-Health research. Telemed E Health 22: 191–197.

Lanfear DE, Jones PG, Cresci S, Tang FM, Rathore SS, Spertus JA (2011) Factors influencing patient willingness to participate in genetic research after a myocardial infarction. Genome Med 3: 39 doi: 10.1186/gm255 21676259

Rodriguez H, Gebretsadik T, Connolly AS, Arnold DH, Larkin EK, Wu PS, et al (2015) Parental willingness to participate in Infant Primary Asthma Prevention Trial. J Allergy Clin Immunol 135: Ab245–Ab245.

Hendren E, Gill J, Landsberg D, Dong JH, Rose C, Gill JS (2015) Willingness of directed living donors and their recipients to participate in kidney paired donation programs. Transplantation 99: 1894–1899. doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000000533 25695874

Mbunda T, Bakari M, Tarimo EAM, Sandstrom E, Kulane A (2014) Factors that influence the willingness of young adults in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, to participate in phase I/II HIV vaccine trials. Glob Health Action 7: 22853 doi: 10.3402/gha.v7.22853 24572007

Smit J, Middelkoop K, Myer L, Seedat S, Bekker LG, Stein DJ (2006) Willingness to participate in HIV vaccine research in a peri-urban South African community. Int J STD AIDS 17: 176–179. 16510005

Perez-Guerra CL, Rodriguez-Acosta RL, Soto-Gomez E, Zielinski-Gutierrez E, Pena-Orellana M, Santiago LM, et al (2012) Assessing the interest to participate in a dengue vaccine efficacy trial among residents of Puerto Rico. Hum Vaccin Immunother 8: 905–915. doi: 10.4161/hv.20056 22832259

Dong Y, Shen X, Guo R, Liu B, Zhu L, Wang J, et al (2014) Willingness to participate in HIV therapeutic vaccine trials among HIV-infected patients on ART in China. PloS One 9: e111321 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0111321 25372044

Wang S, Fridinger F, Sheedy K, Khoury M (2011) Public attitudes regarding the donation and storage of blood specimens for genetic research. Community Genet 4: 18–26.11493749

Chu SH, Kim EJ, Jeong SH, Park GL (2015) Factors associated with willingness to participate in clinical trials: a nationwide survey study. BMC Public Health 15: 10 doi: 10.1186/s12889-014-1339-0 25595373

Braunstein JB, Sherber NS, Schulman SP, Ding EL, Powe NR (2008) Race, medical researcher distrust, perceived harm, and willingness to participate in cardiovascular prevention trials. Medicine (Baltimore) 87: 1–9.18204365

Shavers-Hornaday VL, Lynch CF, Burmeister LF, Torner JC (1997) Why are African Americans under-represented in medical research studies? Impediments to participation. Ethn Health 2: 31–45. 9395587

Shavers VL, Lynch CF, Burmeister LF (2002) Racial differences in factors that influence the willingness to participate in medical research studies. Annals of Epidemiology 12: 248–256. 11988413

McQuillan GM, Porter KS, Agelli M, Kington R (2003) Consent for genetic research in a general population: the NHANES experience. Genet Med 5: 35–42. 12544474

Wong ML, Chia KS, Yam WM, Teodoro GR, Lau KW (2004) Willingness to donate blood samples for genetic research: a survey from a community in Singapore. Clin Genet 65: 45–51. 15032974

Wendler D, Kington R, Madans J, Van Wye G, Christ-Schmidt H, Pratt LA, et al (2006) Are racial and ethnic minorities less willing to participate in health research? PLoS Med 3: e19 16318411

Russell KM, Maraj MS, Wilson LR, Shedd-Steele R, Champion VL (2008) Barriers to recruiting urban African American women into research studies in community settings. Appl Nurs Res 21: 90–97. doi: 10.1016/j.apnr.2006.05.001 18457748

Buchwald D, Mendoza-Jenkins V, Croy C, McGough H, Bezdek M, Spicer P (2006) Attitudes of urban American Indians and Alaska natives regarding participation in research. J Gen Intern Med 21: 648–651. 16808751

Limkakeng A, Phadtare A, Shah J, Vaghasia M, Wei DY, Shah A, et al (2013) Willingness to participate in clinical trials among patients of Chinese heritage: a meta-synthesis. PloS One 8: e51328 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051328 23349672

Kemenkes RI (2015) Profil kesehatan Indonesia tahun 2014.

Prayitno A, Taurel A, Nealon J, Satari H, Karyanti R, Sekartini R, et al (2016) Dengue seroprevalence in urban dwelling Indonesian children: a nationally-representative study. 17th International Congress on Infectious Diseases: Int J Infect Dis. pp. 242.

Karyanti MR, Uiterwaal CS, Kusriastuti R, Hadinegoro SR, Rovers MM, Heesterbeek H, et al (2014) The changing incidence of dengue haemorrhagic fever in Indonesia: a 45-year registry-based analysis. BMC Infect Dis 14: 412 doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-14-412 25064368

WHO (2009) Dengue: guideline for diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and control. Geneva.

Abdullah M, Azib W, Harun M, Burhanuddin M (2013) Reliability and construct validity of knowledge, attitude and practice on dengue fever prevention questionnaire. Am Int J Contemp Res 3: 69–75.

Dhimal M, Aryal KK, Dhimal ML, Gautam I, Singh SP, Bhusal CL, et al (2014) Knowledge, attitude and practice regarding dengue fever among the healthy population of highland and lowland communities in Central Nepal. PloS One 9(7): e102028 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102028 25007284

Filmer D, Pritchett L (1999) The effect of household wealth on educational attainment: Evidence from 35 countries. Popul Dev Rev 25: 85–120.

Hadisoemarto PF, Castro MC (2013) Public acceptance and willingness-to-pay for a future dengue vaccine: a community-based survey in Bandung, Indonesia. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 7(9): e2427 doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002427 24069482

Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests. Psychometrika 16: 297–334.

Iacobucci D, Duhachek A (2003) Advancing alpha: Measuring reliability with confidence. J Consum Psychol 13: 478–487.

Yap BW, Sim CH (2011) Comparisons of various types of normality tests. J Stat Comput Simul 81: 2141–2155.

BPS (2015) Aceh dalam angka 2015. In: Aceh BPSP, editor. Banda Aceh: Badan Pusat Statistik Provinsi Aceh.

Noordzij M, Tripepi G, Dekker FW, Zoccali C, Tanck MW, Jager KJ (2010) Sample size calculations: basic principles and common pitfalls. Nephrol Dial Transplant 25: 1388–1393. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfp732 20067907

Harapan H, Anwar A, Setiawan A, Sasmono R, Bustaman A, Radiansyah A, et al (2016) Dengue vaccine acceptance and associated factors in Indonesia: a community-based cross-sectional survey in Aceh. Vaccine 43: 3670–3675.27208588

Koenraadt CJ, Tuiten W, Sithiprasasna R, Kijchalao U, Jones JW, Scott TW (2005) Dengue knowledge and practices and their impact on Aedes aegypti populations in Kamphaeng Phet, Thailand. Am J Trop Med Hyg 73: 156–157.

Bonett DG, Wright TA (2000) Sample size requirements for estimating Pearson, Kendall and Spearman correlations. Psychometrika 65: 23–28.

Bower P, Wilson S, Mathers N (2007) How often do UK primary care trials face recruitment delays?. Fam Pract 24: 601–603. 17872907

Sygna K, Johansen S, Ruland CM (2015) Recruitment challenges in clinical research including cancer patients and their caregivers. a randomized controlled trial study and lessons learned. Trials 16: 428 doi: 10.1186/s13063-015-0948-y 26407547

Effler PV, Pang L, Kitsutani P, Vorndam V, Nakata M, Ayers T, et al (2005) Dengue fever, Hawaii, 2001–2002. Emerg Infect Dis 11: 742–749. 15890132

Bhatti P, Sigurdson AJ, Wang SS, Chen J, Rothman N, Hartge P, et al (2005) Genetic variation and willingness to participate in epidemiologic research: data from three studies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 14: 2449–2453. 16214931

Wang S, Fridinger F, Sheedy KA, Linnan H, Khoury MJ (1999) Public attitudes regarding the donation and storage of blood specimens for genetic research. Am J Hum Genet 65: A411–A411.

Brown DR, Topcu M (2003) Willingness to participate in clinical treatment research among older African Americans and whites. Gerontologist 43: 62–72. 12604747

Suhud U, Syabai N (2014) Halal sex tourism in Indonesia: understanding the motivation of young female host to marry with middle eastern male tourists. J Eco Sustain Dev 5: 91–94.

Godskesen T, Hansson MG, Nygren P, Nordin K, Kihlbom U (2015) Hope for a cure and altruism are the main motives behind participation in phase 3 clinical cancer trials. Eur J Cancer Care 24: 133–141.

McCann SK, Campbell MK, Entwistle VA (2010) Reasons for participating in randomised controlled trials: conditional altruism and considerations for self. Trials 11: 31 doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-11-31 20307273

Pulley JM, Brace MM, Bernard GR, Masys DR (2008) Attitudes and perceptions of patients towards methods of establishing a DNA biobank. Cell Tissue Bank 9: 55–65. 17960495

Treweek S, Lockhart P, Pitkethly M, Cook JA, Kjeldstrom M, Johansen M, et al (2013) Methods to improve recruitment to randomised controlled trials: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 3: e002360 doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002360 23396504

McQuillan GM, Pan QY, Porter KS (2006) Consent for genetic research in a general population: an update on the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey experience. Genet Med 8: 354–360. 16778597

Lanfear DE, Jones PG, Cresci S, Tang F, Rathore SS, Spertus JA (2008) Patient willingness to participate in genetic research after a myocardial infarction. Circulation 118: S624–S624.

Kettis-Lindblad A, Ring L, Viberth E, Hansson MG (2006) Genetic research and donation of tissue samples to biobanks. What do potential sample donors in the Swedish general public think? Eur J Pub Health 16: 433–440.16207726

Ford BM, Evans JS, Stoffel EM, Balmana J, Regan MM, Syngal S (2006) Factors associated with enrollment in cancer genetics research. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 15: 1355–1359. 16835336

Harapan H, Anwar S, Bustaman A, Radiansyah A, Angraini P, Fasli R, et al (2016) Knowledge, attitude, and practice regarding dengue infection among healthy inhabitants in Aceh, Indonesia Unpublished results.

Comis RL, Miller JD, Aldige CR, Krebs L, Stoval E (2003) Public attitudes toward participation in cancer clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 21: 830–835. 12610181

Afshar R, Sanavi S, Rajabi MR (2012) Attitude and willingness of high school students toward organ donation. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl 23: 929–933. doi: 10.4103/1319-2442.100863 22982902

Du W, Mood D, Gadgeel S, Simon MS (2008) An educational video to increase clinical trials enrollment among lung cancer patients. J Thorac Oncol 3: 23–29. doi: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e31815e8bb2 18166837

Krousel-Wood MA, Re RN, Abdoh A, Chambers R, Altobello C, Ginther B, et al (2001) The effect of education on patients' willingness to participate in a telemedicine study. J Telemed Telecare 7: 281–287. 11571083

Lin JS, Finlay A, Tu A, Gany FM (2005) Understanding immigrant Chinese Americans' participation in cancer screening and clinical trials. J Community Health 30: 451–466. 16370055

Dunlop AL, Leroy ZC, Logue KM, Glanz K, Dunlop BW (2011) Preconsent education about research processes improved African Americans' willingness to participate in clinical research. J Clin Epidemiol 64: 872–877. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.11.008 21330104

[Back]

Table 1. Characteristics of participants and univariate logistic regression analysis showing predictors of willingness to participate (WTP) in a dengue study (good vs. poor) (n = 535).

Variable | n (%) | WTP score | WTP (Good/Poor) | Univariate logistic regression
OR (95% CI) | P–value
Regency |  |  |  |  | 0.734
 Aceh Tengah (R) | 65 (12.1) | 7.12±2.06 | 12/53 | 1 |
 Langsa | 74 (13.8) | 7.42±1.90 | 14/60 | 1.03 (0.44–2.42) | 0.945
 Aceh Besar | 88 (16.4) | 6.93±2.36 | 20/68 | 1.30 (0.58–2.89) | 0.522
 Aceh Utara | 43 (8.0) | 7.05±2.31 | 10/33 | 1.34 (0.52–3.44) | 0.546
 Aceh Singkil | 49 (9.2) | 7.12±2.02 | 9/40 | 0.99 (0.38–2.59) | 0.990
 Sabang | 56 (10.5) | 7.23±1.66 | 6/50 | 0.53 (0.18–1.52) | 0.238
 Aceh Timur | 33 (6.2) | 7.15±2.11 | 7/26 | 1.19 (0.42–3.38) | 0.745
 Aceh Selatan | 67 (12.5) | 6.36±2.40 | 10/57 | 0.77 (0.31–1.94) | 0.586
 Aceh Tamiang | 60 (11.2) | 7.43±1.95 | 14/46 | 1.34 (0.56–3.20) | 0.503
Age group |  |  |  |  | 0.273
 17–29 (R) | 289 (54.0) | 6.97±2.26 | 63/226 | 1 |
 30–44 | 179 (33.5) | 7.24±1.94 | 31/148 | 0.75 (0.47–1.21) | 0.241
 45–59 | 60 (11.2) | 7.08±1.93 | 7/53 | 0.47 (0.20–1.09) | 0.080
 60–84 | 7 (1.3) | 7.42±1.90 | 1/6 | 0.60 (0.07–5.06) | 0.637
Sex |  |  |  |  | 0.023*
 Male (R) | 166 (31.0) | 6.97±2.07 | 22/144 | 1 |
 Female | 369 (69.0) | 7.13±2.14 | 80/289 | 1.81 (1.08–3.02) |
Education |  |  |  |  | 0.109
 Primary (R) | 34 (6.4) | 6.85±1.79 | 3/31 | 1 |
 Junior high school | 31 (5.8) | 6.39±2.14 | 1/30 | 0.34 (0.03–3.50) | 0.368
 Senior high school | 207 (38.7) | 6.93±2.18 | 39/168 | 2.40 (0.70–8.25) | 0.165
 Diploma | 114 (21.3) | 7.34±2.03 | 26/88 | 3.05 (0.86–10.80) | 0.083
 University graduate | 149 (27.9) | 7.28±2.13 | 33/116 | 2.94 (0.84–10.22) | 0.090
Occupation |  |  |  |  | 0.079
 Farmer (R) | 139 (26.0) | 7.11±1.61 | 26/113 | 1 |
 Civil servant | 83 (15.5) | 7.29±1.97 | 20/63 | 2.84 (1.11–7.23) | 0.029*
 Private employee | 100 (18.7) | 7.01±2.38 | 21/79 | 3.91 (1.48–10.35) | 0.006*
 Entrepreneur | 80 (15.0) | 7.07±2.14 | 6/74 | 3.28 (1.25–8.57) | 0.015*
 Student/university student | 133 (24.9) | 6.88±2.33 | 29/104 | 3.44 (1.36–8.70) | 0.009*
Religion |  |  |  |  | 0.999
 Muslim (R) | 528 (98.7) | 7.07±2.13 | 102/426 | 1 |
 Other | 7 (1.3) | 7.43±0.97 | 0/7 | 0.00 (0.00-NA) |
Marital status |  |  |  |  | 0.204
 Unmarried (R) | 228 (42.6) | 6.98±2.28 | 51/177 | 1 |
 Married | 289 (54.0) | 7.10±2.02 | 47/242 | 0.67 (0.43–1.05) | 0.080
 Widowed | 18 (3.4) | 8.0±1.08 | 4/14 | 0.99 (0.31–3.14) | 0.989
Monthly income |  |  |  |  | 0.137
 <1 million (R) | 270 (50.5) | 7.02±2.16 | 56/214 | 1 |
 1—≤ 2 million | 108 (20.2) | 6.77±2.13 | 15/93 | 0.61 (0.33–1.14) | 0.126
 2—≤ 3 million | 88 (16.4) | 7.10±2.02 | 13/75 | 0.66 (0.34–1.28) | 0.220
 > 3 million | 69 (12.9) | 7.74±1.94 | 18/51 | 1.35 (0.73–2.49) | 0.338
Type of residence |  |  |  |  | 0.598
 Suburb (R) | 177 (33.1) | 7.16±2.14 | 36/141 | 1 |
 City | 358 (66.9) | 7.04±2.11 | 66/292 | 1.13 (0.72–1.78) |
Have family member(s) suffered from dengue? |  |  |  |  | 0.213
 No (R) | 117 (21.9) | 7.12±2.30 | 27/90 | 1 |
 Yes | 418 (78.1) | 7.07±2.07 | 75/343 | 1.37 (0.83–2.26) |
Have you personally suffered from dengue? |  |  |  |  | 0.275
 No (R) | 48 (9.0) | 7.44±2.10 | 12/36 | 1 |
 Yes | 487 (91.0) | 7.04±2.12 | 90/397 | 1.47 (0.74–2.94) |
Socioeconomic level |  |  |  |  | 0.293
 Poorest quintile (R) | 107 (20) | 6.86±1.99 | 14/93 | 1 |
 2nd | 107 (20) | 6.90±2.18 | 22/85 | 1.71 (0.82–3.57) | 0.147
 3rd | 107 (20) | 6.91±2.15 | 18/89 | 1.34 (0.63–2.86) | 0.444
 4th | 107 (20) | 7.25±2.15 | 22/85 | 1.71 (0.82–3.57) | 0.147
 Richest quintile | 107 (20) | 7.48±2.07 | 26/81 | 2.71 (1.04–4.35) | 0.038*
Knowledge regarding dengue fever |  |  |  |  | <0.001**
 Poor (R) | 341 (63.7) | 6.82±2.07 | 41/300 | 1 |
 Good | 194 (36.3) | 7.54±2.12 | 61/133 | 3.36 (2.15–5.24) |
Attitude towards dengue fever |  |  |  |  | <0.001**
 Poor (R) | 381 (71.2) | 6.68±2.06 | 39/342 | 1 |
 Good | 154 (28.8) | 8.06±1.94 | 63/91 | 6.07 (3.83–9.63) |
Preventive practice against dengue fever |  |  |  |  | 0.018*
 Poor (R) | 377 (70.5) | 6.96±2.11 | 62/315 | 1 |
 Good | 158 (29.5) | 7.37±2.11 | 40/118 | 1.72 (1.10–2.70) |

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159139.t001

CI: confidence interval, OR: odds ratio, R: reference group

* Significant at 0.05

**Significant at 0.01

[Back]

[Back]

Table 2. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showing predictors of willingness to participate (WTP) in dengue study (good vs. poor) (n = 535).

Independent variable | Attitude to research
aOR (95% CI) | P–value
Sex |  | 0.260
 Male (R) | 1 |
 Female | 1.40 (0.77–2.54) |
Education |  | 0.661
 Primary (R) | 1 |
 Junior high school | 0.97 (0.21–4.52) | 0.972
 Senior high school | 1.35 (0.29–6.34) | 0.701
 Diploma | 1.43 (0.33–6.24) | 0.633
 University graduate | 0.43 (0.04–4.81) | 0.494
Occupation |  | 0.558
 Farmer (R) | 1 |
 Civil servant | 1.69 (0.48–5.95) | 0.416
 Private employee | 1.41 (0.36–5.42) | 0.621
 Entrepreneur | 2.39 (0.73–7.82) | 0.149
 Student/university student | 1.63 (0.44–5.99) | 0.462
Marital status |  | 0.794
 Unmarried (R) | 1 |
 Married | 1.66 (0.37–7.36) | 0.504
 Widowed | 1.04 (0.53–2.06) | 0.905
Monthly income |  | 0.185
 <1 million (R) | 1 |
 1—≤ 2 million | 1.13 (0.44–2.90) | 0.791
 2—≤ 3 million | 0.54 (0.22–1.34) | 0.183
 > 3 million | 0.54 (0.25–1.16) | 0.117
Have family member(s) suffered from dengue? |  | 0.145
 No (R) | 1 |
 Yes | 1.56 (0.86–2.82) |
Knowledge regarding dengue fever |  | 0.002*
 Poor (R) | 1 |
 Good | 2.30 (1.36–3.90) |
Attitude towards dengue fever |  | <0.001**
 Poor (R) | 1 |
 Good | 3.73 (2.24–6.21) |
Preventive practice against dengue fever |  | 0.373
 Poor (R) | 1 |
 Good | 1.28 (0.75–2.18) |

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159139.t002

CI: confidence interval, aOR: adjusted odds ratio, R: reference group

* Significant at 0.05

**Significant at 0.01

[Back]

[Back]

Table 3. Correlation between willingness to participate (WTP) in dengue research, socioeconomic status and knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) regarding dengue (n = 535).

Variables | Correlation (95% CI) | P-value
Socioeconomic status—WTP | 0.09 (0.02–0.16) | 0.032*
Knowledge regarding dengue—WTP | 0.19 (0.12–0.26) | <0.001**
Attitude regarding dengue—WTP | 0.49 (0.43–0.54) | <0.001**
Preventive practice against dengue—WTP | 0.13 (0.06–0.20) | <0.001**

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159139.t003

CI: confidence interval

* Significant at 0.05

**Significant at 0.01

[Back]