Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

JPMPH : Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health

OPEN ACCESS
SEARCH
Search

Articles

Page Path
HOME > J Prev Med Public Health > Volume 56(6); 2023 > Article
Original Article
Teachers’ Negative Attitudes and Limited Health Literacy Levels as Risks for Low Awareness of Epilepsy in Turkey
Gulay Yilmazelorcid
Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health 2023;56(6):573-582.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3961/jpmph.23.330
Published online: November 13, 2023
  • 1,116 Views
  • 58 Download

Hitit University Faculty of Health Science, Çorum, Turkey

Corresponding author: Gulay Yilmazel, Hitit University Faculty of Health Science, Gazi Street 96, Çorum 19030, Turkey E-mail: dr.gyilmazel@gmail.com
• Received: July 20, 2023   • Revised: November 5, 2023   • Accepted: November 6, 2023

Copyright © 2023 The Korean Society for Preventive Medicine

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

  • Objectives
    For students with epilepsy, schools are a critical environment for managing the disease properly. This study examined awareness of epilepsy, attitudes toward epilepsy, and health literacy among school teachers in Turkey.
  • Methods
    This study was conducted in a city in Turkey with 1408 public school teachers from June 2021 to September 2021.
  • Results
    The median scores of the scales were 5, 29, and 32 for epilepsy awareness, epilepsy attitudes, and health literacy, respectively. Epilepsy awareness was higher in women, and epilepsy attitudes were more positive in women than men (p<0.05). While epilepsy awareness was higher in primary school teachers, epilepsy attitudes were more positive in secondary school teachers (p<0.05). Epilepsy awareness was lower in secondary school teachers (odds ratio [OR], 1.27; p<0.05), those who did not have an individual with epilepsy in their family/social environment (OR, 1.57; p<0.001), those who did not have a student with epilepsy in their class (OR, 1.45; p<0.05), and in those who had not witnessed an epilepsy seizure (OR,1.19; p<0.05). Compared to those with positive attitudes regarding epilepsy, epilepsy awareness was 1.36 times lower in those with negative attitudes (p<0.001). Epilepsy awareness was 1.92 times lower in those with limited health literacy than those with adequate health literacy (p<0.001).
  • Conclusions
    In this study, low epilepsy awareness, negative epilepsy attitudes, and limited health literacy were common among teachers. The findings from this study suggest that panels, workshops, and health training on epilepsy should be organized for school teachers and included at regular intervals in certified first-aid practices.
Epilepsy, often neglected as a burden on the public health agenda, is a common neurological disease affecting approximately 50 million people of all ages worldwide. The global prevalence is estimated to be 7.6 cases per 1000 people [1]. The prevalence of epilepsy in Turkey varies between 4 and 5 cases per 1000 people [2,3].
Although epilepsy is one of the most common chronic diseases, it is often unfamiliar to the public. Individuals with epilepsy are targeted by social stigma and discrimination, which may reflect cultural differences in public awareness and attitudes towards the disease. General misperceptions are clustered in terms of causes, prognosis, treatment of epilepsy, and first aid measures during an epileptic seizure [4].
Epilepsy is a disease characterized by seizures and involuntary movements caused by the abnormally high electrical activity of neurons in the brain. Such aberrant activity can result in a broad spectrum of activity, from convulsions to a phenomenon that may come and go unnoticed within a few seconds [5]. False and inaccurate perceptions that the disease is a form of insanity, contagious, and incurable lead to stigma [1].
People with epilepsy are prone to post-seizure physical injuries [6]. First aid measures aim to prevent harm to people with epilepsy during a seizure. Lack of awareness and misunderstandings about first aid measures affect the likelihood of someone taking helpful or harmful measures while witnessing a seizure [7].
The complexity of epilepsy and the diverse cultural perceptions associated with the disease have led to the need to promote awareness of epilepsy in the general population, particularly among groups with limited health literacy (HL) [8]. HL pertains to people’s knowledge and competencies to meet complex health demands in modern societies [9].
As a social determinant of health, HL has become a critical skill for today’s societies in disease prevention, control, receiving healthcare, and benefiting from health services [10]. Studies conducted in different countries have reported that teachers’ HL levels were limited [11,12]. A similar situation holds true for Turkish teachers [13]. As in other chronic diseases, it is expected that the family, the whole society, and the patient should be health-literate in managing epilepsy [7,14-16].
Children and young people with epilepsy are exposed to incorrect views in social settings such as school. Students may experience difficulties adapting to school, learning, and interacting socially. These difficulties may be caused not only by epilepsy itself but also by their teachers’ attitudes and expectations [17].
Schools must increase knowledge and awareness about epilepsy to reduce stigma and improve negative attitudes towards the disease. In addition, it is necessary to determine teachers’ training needs and evaluate their first aid skills. Starting public health interventions with school teachers will raise awareness among students and society. The steps that improve the HL of teachers will also provide support for developing epilepsy awareness (EAW) and improving the disease’s management in educational environments.
Research Problems
(1) What is the level of EAW among teachers?; (2) What is the level of epilepsy attitudes (EAT) among teachers?; (3) What is the level of HL among teachers?; (4) Is the EAW of teachers related to socio-demographic factors?; and (5) Is EAW among teachers related to EAT and HL?
Hypothesis of the Study
There are relationships among EAW, socio-demographic factors, EAT, and HL.
This study examined EAW, EAT toward epilepsy, and HL among school teachers.
Study Design
This descriptive, correlational study was conducted in Çorum Province, Turkey from June 2021 to September 2021. The research universe consisted of 3800 teachers working in public schools in the city center. HL level in adults was taken as a reference to determine the sample size in the study [18]. According to the current literature, adequate HL was considered to be 30% with a 5% margin of error. The sample size was 1417 with a 95% confidence interval and 80% power. The study included 1408 teachers who could be reached.
Data Collection Tools
Research data were collected using a socio-demographic data form prepared by the researchers, an EAW scale, an EAT scale, and an HL scale.
Socio-demographic Form
The form consisted of 9 questions to determine teachers’ socio-demographic characteristics. The questions included age, sex, marital status, educational level, type of institution, years of experience, presence of chronic disease, existence of people with epilepsy among family and friends, presence of students with epilepsy in the class, and history of witnessing people with epileptic seizures. The questions about the disease were asked to determine the teachers’ awareness of epilepsy.
Epilepsy Awareness Scale
Teachers were asked 12 questions to determine their awareness of the disease’s characteristics, treatability, causes, and first aid practices. One point was awarded for each correct answer. Higher scores indicated greater awareness. In this study, according to the median score (5 points), EAW was categorized into two groups: high awareness (≥5 points) and low awareness (<5 points).
Society’s Attitudes Towards Epilepsy Scale
The scale developed by Lim et al. [6] is grouped into 2 areas, general and personal, and consists of 14 items. The general area comprises 9 items, and the personal area comprises 5 items. The general area addresses general attitudes towards epilepsy, while the personal area asks the participant to consider personal life issues such as marriage and employment. Each item is scored on a 5-point Likert scale where “strongly agree” is given 1 point, and “strongly disagree” is given 5 points. Items 2, 5, 10, 11, and 14 on the scale are scored inversely. The higher the score obtained from the scale, the more negative the attitude [6]. In this study, the Turkish version of the scale [19] was used (Supplemental Material 1), and according to the median value, the EAT score was divided into positive (<29 points) and negative attitudes (≥29 points).
European Health Literacy Scale
This study used the Turkish version of the European Health Literacy Scale (HLS-EU). The 47-item self-report scale was developed to assess HL in people aged ≥15 years. On the scale, 0 indicates the lowest HL level, and 50 indicates the highest level. The formula (Index=[Average−1]×50/3) is used to evaluate the scale [20]. The Turkish version of the scale was used in this study [21] (Supplemental Material 2). Using the median value as a cut-off, a score of <32 points was considered to indicate a limited HL level.
Statistical Analysis
The data were analyzed using SPSS version 22 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). During the data analysis, the frequency was used for categorical variables (number, percentage, chi-square test), and descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation, and median) were used for quantitative variables.
This study’s outcome variable was EAW, divided into two categories (low and high) according to the median score. The association with HL and EAT was subsequently analyzed using the chi-square test.
First, on a binary scale, EAT was classified into negative and positive categories, and an association with socio-demographic factors on EAW was shown. Furthermore, since the HL scores were classified into 2 categories, associations among socio-demographic factors and HL (limited and adequate) were analyzed. The subsequent analyses used multivariate models to assess the mutual influence among EAT, HL, EAW, and other socio-demographic variables. In the analysis, the significance level was set at 0.05.
Ethics Statement
The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Hitit University (2022-89).
Descriptive Characteristics of the Participants
In the study group, 44.7% of the participants were between 35 years and 44 years old, with a mean age of 43 years; 48.9% of the participants were females and 70.9% were working in primary schools. While the rate of individuals with epilepsy in their family/social environment was 10.9%, the rate of students with epilepsy in their classroom was 17.0%, and 35.4% of the teachers stated that they had witnessed a seizure in individuals who experienced epileptic seizures. The socio-demographic characteristics of the participants are given in Table 1.
EAW was high in 56.3% and low in 43.8% of the participants. EAT was positive in 53.1% and negative in 46.9% of the participants. For HL, 47.4% of participants showed an adequate level, whereas 52.6% had a limited HL level.
Table 1 shows EAW and EAT according to participants’ socio-demographic characteristics. A statistically significant difference in EAW and EAT was found according to sex: 61.5% of female had high EAW scores, compared to 50.8% of male (p<0.001), and 57.0% of female had a positive EAT score, compared to 48.9% of male (p<0.05). Epilepsy awareness showed a statistically significant difference according to the teachers’ institutional types. Whereas 58.6% of primary school teachers had a high EAW, this rate was 50.5% among secondary school teachers (p<0.05). Positive EAT was the highest among secondary school teachers with a result of 59.5% (p<0.05). Among those who had individuals with epilepsy in their family/social environment, EAW and positive EAT were significantly higher, with scores of 72.7% (p<0.001) and 62.3% (p<0.05), respectively. EAW was significantly higher in 68.2% of those who had students with epilepsy in their class and 64.9% of those who had witnessed an epileptic seizure (p<0.001). In this study, EAW and EAT did not differ significantly regarding age, marital status, educational level, seniority, or chronic disease (p>0.05).
Table 2 shows the EAT and HL levels of the participants according to EAW. Among those who answered “no” to the question of whether epilepsy is a neurological disease, 59.7% had a positive attitude towards epilepsy (p<0.001), while 59.1% had significantly more limited HL (p<0.001). Among those who answered “no” to the question of whether epilepsy is a treatable disease, 55.6% had a positive attitude towards epilepsy (p<0.05), while 54.3% had limited HL (p<0.001). HL levels were significantly adequate for 50.8% of those who stated that epilepsy may develop due to brain tumors (p<0.05), as well as for 77.0% of those who stated that epilepsy may develop due to a congenital defect (p<0.001). EAW was more positive in 72.6% of those who stated that cerebral ischemia could cause epilepsy (p<0.001). EAT was more negative in 54.1% of those who stated that central nervous system inflammation could cause epilepsy (p<0.001).
It was observed that participants’ awareness of first aid practices differed significantly in terms of EAT and HL. Among those who answered “no” to the question of whether they would remove foreign objects near a person having a seizure, 56.6% had a negative EAT, and 60.6% had a more limited level of HL (p<0.001). Among those who answered “no” to the question, “I would wait with a person with epilepsy until their seizure passes,” 55.6% had a strongly negative EAT, while 61.7% had a higher rate of limited HL (p<0.001). The answer “yes” to the question, “I would loosen the tight clothes of the person having a seizure,” was found to indicate a more positive EAT in 63.1% of participants, and HL was found to be adequate in 52.1% (p<0.001). Among those who answered “yes” to the question, “I would check whether the person with epilepsy has a medical bracelet or other emergency information,” 65.7% had a more positive EAT (p<0.001), and 51.8% had adequate HL (p<0.05). HL was found to be adequate in 62.0% of those who answered “yes” to the question, “If the seizure lasted longer than 5 minutes, I would call an ambulance” (p<0.001).
Table 3 shows the results of the multiple regression analysis of factors associated with low EAW. First, in a binary regression analysis the relationships among socio-demographic factors, EAT, and HL were determined. Positive EAT scores were 1.06 times higher and adequate HL scores were 1.44 times higher in female than in male (p<0.05). Among secondary school teachers, positive EAT scores were 1.46 times higher and adequate HL scores were 1.17 times higher (p<0.05). Positive EAT scores were 1.27 times higher and adequate HL scores were 1.11 times higher in those who had individuals with epilepsy in their family/social environment (p<0.05). In the multiple logistic regression, EAW was 1.27 times lower in secondary school teachers than primary school teachers (p<0.05) and 1.57 times lower in those who did not have individuals with epilepsy in their family/social environment compared to those who did (p<0.001). Furthermore, EAW was 1.45 times lower in those who did not have a student with epilepsy in their class, 1.19 times lower in those who had not witnessed an epileptic seizure (p<0.05), 1.36 times lower in those with a negative EAT than those with a positive EAT (p<0.001), and 1.92 times lower in those with limited HL than those with adequate HL (p<0.001).
Figure 1 shows the positions of 4 groups of variables (some demographic characteristics, EAW, EAT, and HL) in relation to each other. Figure 2 shows the dimensions of EAT and HL according to EAW. In both figures, teachers’ EAW scores are shown to differ in terms of socio-demographic factors, EAT, and HL.
The quality of life of school-age children and youth with epilepsy may be affected by negative attitudes in the school environment and poor awareness of the disease. This can increase the fragility of students with epilepsy. Teachers are leaders in supporting and ensuring the safety of students with epilepsy. However, their low awareness of the disease may leave teachers helpless about first-aid practices during their shifts.
In the literature, it has been demonstrated that teachers’ understanding of epilepsy differs according to country. Whereas teachers’ understanding of epilepsy was low in Turkey, Greece, Japan, and Kuwait [22-25], it was found to be moderate in Jordan [26] and high in Saudi Arabia [27].
The current study determined that participating teachers’ attitudes towards epilepsy were negative, their awareness was low, and their HL level was limited (Table 1). Other studies have reported that teachers’ awareness of the disease was low, their attitudes were negative, and their awareness of first-aid practices during a seizure was insufficient [28-31].
This study concurs with the literature that insufficient awareness about epilepsy leads to negative attitudes. On the other hand, teachers’ low awareness and negative attitudes towards the disease coincided with their HL limitations (Tables 2 and 3). The situation reflects teachers’ HL levels. In fact, it was observed that the most vital determinant of low awareness is limited HL (Table 3). Limited HL among teachers is a global problem that creates a barrier to disease awareness [32-35].
In the present study, female teachers were more aware of epilepsy and had more positive attitudes than male teachers (Table 1), and in an Iranian study, it was revealed that female teachers had greater knowledge of the disease [36]. This result may be due to the social structure and characteristics of the society. Female teachers may be more sensitive to the disease with the responsibilities brought by a maternal role.
In this study, it is a pleasing result that EAW was relatively high among primary school teachers. Indeed, epilepsy is the most common chronic neurological pathology in children, and 1 in every 150 children worldwide has epilepsy in the first 10 years of life [37]. Children and teens with epilepsy are at risk for seizures; teachers are the first to respond if a child has a seizure while at school. Teachers should know when to transfer patients to the hospital and should be able to provide first aid for seizures.
During a generalized seizure, the teacher’s role is to keep the student in a safe position and monitor the student for the duration of the seizure. Patients should be placed in the recovery position when the seizure is over. In this study, one of the influential factors on disease awareness was having an individual with epilepsy in the participant’s family/social environment or the classroom and having witnessed an epileptic seizure (Tables 2 and 3). Being near individuals with epilepsy and witnessing seizures can heighten awareness of the disease. Nonetheless, although large numbers of epileptic seizures are witnessed by teachers [38,39], it was also reported that the rate of receiving first-aid training was low [40].
This study, conducted in a city in the Central Black Sea region of Turkey, showed that teachers’ negative attitudes and limited HL levels indicated their limited awareness of epilepsy. Knowledge gaps regarding the cause of the disease, risk factors, and first aid practices may result from prejudices about the disease. Panels, workshops, and health training on epilepsy should be organized for school teachers and included in certified first aid practices at regular intervals. It is suggested that future research be conducted to evaluate teachers’ EAW, EAT, and skill tendencies in first-aid practice. In addition, teachers’ health competencies should be assessed.
Supplemental materials are available at https://doi.org/10.3961/jpmph.23.330.

Supplemental Material 1.

EPILEPSY AWARENESS SCALE
jpmph-23-330-Supplementary-1.docx

Supplemental Material 2.

EUROPEAN HEALTH LITERACY SCALE
jpmph-23-330-Supplementary-2.docx

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The author has no conflicts of interest associated with the material presented in this paper.

FUNDING

None.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

All work was done by GY.

None.
Figure. 1.
Relative positions of the 4 group variables. EAW, epilepsy awareness; EAT, epilepsy attitudes; HL, health literacy.
jpmph-23-330f1.jpg
Figure. 2.
Relationship between items of EAW and scores for EAT and HL. EAW, epilepsy awareness; EAT, epilepsy attitudes; HL, health literacy.
jpmph-23-330f2.jpg
Table 1.
EAW and EAT according to socio-demographic characteristics
Characteristics Total EAW (median score: 5)
EAT (median score: 29)
Low (n = 616, 43.8%) High (n = 792, 56.3%) Negative (n=661, 46.9%) Positive (n=747, 53.1%)
Age (mean±SD: 43.3±7.5, y)
25-34 182 (12.9) 86 (47.3) 96 (52.7) 92 (50.5) 90 (49.5)
35-44 630 (44.7) 275 (43.7) 355 (56.3) 284 (45.1) 346 (54.9)
45-54 596 (42.3) 255 (42.8) 341 (57.2) 285 (47.8) 311 (52.2)
p-value1 0.567 0.366
Sex
Male 719 (51.1) 339 (49.2) 350 (50.8) 352 (51.1) 337 (48.9)
Female 689 (48.9) 277 (38.5) 442 (61.5) 309 (43.0) 410 (57.0)
p-value1 <0.001 0.002
Marital status
Single 346 (24.6) 165 (47.7) 181 (52.3) 177 (51.2) 169 (48.8)
Married 1062 (75.4) 451 (42.5) 611 (57.5) 484 (45.6) 578 (54.4)
p-value1 0.089 0.070
Educational level
University 1211 (86.0) 519 (42.9) 692 (57.1) 576 (47.6) 635 (52.4)
Postgraduate 197 (14.0) 97 (49.2) 100 (50.8) 85 (45.2) 112 (54.8)
p-value1 0.094 0.249
School type
Primary 998 (70.9) 413 (41.4) 585 (58.6) 495 (49.6) 503 (50.4)
Secondary 410 (29.1) 203 (49.5) 207 (50.5) 166 (40.5) 244 (59.5)
p-value1 0.005 0.002
Experience (y)
1-5 195 (13.8) 91 (46.6) 104 (53.4) 99 (50.8) 96 (49.2)
6-10 610 (43.3) 282 (46.2) 328 (53.8) 273 (44.8) 337 (55.2)
≥11 603 (42.8) 243 (41.2) 360 (59.7) 289 (52.3) 314 (47.7)
p-value1 0.077 0.278
Chronic disease
Yes 316 (22.4) 143 (45.3) 173 (54.7) 141 (44.6) 175 (55.4)
No 1092 (77.6) 473 (43.3) 619 (56.7) 520 (47.6) 572 (52.4)
p-value1 0.541 0.347
People with epilepsy in family/social environment
Yes 154 (10.9) 42 (27.3) 112 (72.7) 58 (37.7) 96 (62.3)
No 1254 (89.1) 574 (45.8) 680 (54.2) 603 (48.1) 651 (51.9)
p-value1 <0.001 0.014
Students with epilepsy in the classroom
Yes 239 (17.0) 76 (31.8) 163 (68.2) 119 (49.8) 120 (50.2)
No 1169 (83.0) 540 (46.2) 629 (53.8) 542 (46.4) 627 (53.6)
p-value1 <0.001 0.333
Witnessed an epileptic seizure
Yes 498 (35.4) 175 (35.1) 323 (64.9) 247 (49.6) 251 (50.4)
No 910 (64.6) 441 (48.5) 469 (51.5) 414 (45.5) 496 (54.5)
p-value1 <0.001 0.140

Values are presented as number (%).

EAW, epilepsy awareness; EAT, epilepsy attitudes; SD, standard deviation.

1 Chi-square test.

Table 2.
HL levels and EATs according to epilepsy awareness
Awareness items EAT (median score: 29)
p-value1 HL (median score: 32)
p-value1
Negative (n=661; 46.9%) Positive (n=747; 53.1%) Limited (n =740; 52.6%) Adequate (n=668; 47.4%)
Items on general awareness of disease
Epilepsy is a neurological disease <0.001 <0.001
 Yes 464 (50.5) 455 (49.5) 451 (49.1) 468 (50.9)
 No 197 (40.3) 292 (59.7) 289 (59.1) 200 (40.9)
Epilepsy is a treatable disease 0.003 <0.001
 Yes 219 (53.0) 194 (47.0) 200 (48.4) 213 (51.6)
 No 442 (44.4) 553 (55.6) 540 (54.3) 455 (45.7)
A brain tumor can cause epilepsy 0.074 0.046
 Yes 234 (43.9) 299 (56.1) 262 (49.2) 271 (50.8)
 No 427 (48.8) 448 (51.2) 478 (54.6) 397 (45.4)
Epilepsy can be caused by head trauma 0.189 0.060
 Yes 197 (44.4) 247 (55.6) 217 (48.9) 227 (51.1)
 No 464 (48.1) 500 (51.9) 523 (54.3) 441 (45.7)
Birth defects can cause epilepsy 0.823 <0.001
 Yes 217 (47.5) 240 (52.5) 105 (33.0) 352 (77.0)
 No 444 (46.7) 507 (53.3) 635 (64.1) 316 (35.9)
Cerebral stroke may be the cause of epilepsy <0.001 0.182
 Yes 59 (27.4) 156 (72.6) 122 (56.7) 93 (43.3)
 No 602 (50.5) 591 (49.5) 618 (51.8) 575 (48.2)
Epilepsy may be caused by inflammation of the central nervous system <0.001 0.468
 Yes 322 (54.1) 273 (45.9) 306 (51.4) 289 (48.6)
 No 339 (41.7) 474 (58.3) 434 (53.4) 379 (46.6)
Items on first aid awareness
I would remove foreign objects near a person having a seizure <0.001 <0.001
 Yes 314 (39.5) 482 (60.5) 369 (46.4) 427 (53.6)
 No 347 (56.6) 265 (33.4) 371 (60.6) 241(39.4)
I would wait with a person with epilepsy until their seizure passes <0.001 <0.001
 Yes 366 (31.7) 512 (58.3) 413 (47.0) 465 (53.0)
 No 295 (55.6) 235 (34.4) 327 (61.7) 203 (38.3)
I would loosen the tight clothes of a person having a seizure 0.003 <0.001
 Yes 258 (38.9) 442 (63.1) 335 (47.9) 365 (52.1)
 No 403 (56.9) 305 (33.1) 405 (57.2) 303 (42.8)
I would check whether the person with epilepsy has a medical bracelet or other emergency information <0.001 0.015
 Yes 199 (34.3) 382 (65.7) 280 (48.1) 301 (51.8)
 No 462 (55.9) 365 (44.1) 460 (55.6) 367 (44.4)
If the seizure lasted longer than 5 minutes, I would call an ambulance 0.646 <0.001
 Yes 347 (47.5) 383 (52.5) 277 (38.0) 453 (62.0)
 No 314 (46.3) 364 (53.7) 463 (68.3) 215 (31.6)

Values are presented as number (%).

EAT, epilepsy attitudes; HL, health literacy.

1 Chi-square test.

Table 3.
Significantly associated variables with low awareness about epilepsy using logistic regression analysis1
Variables Adjusted OR (95% CI) p-value2
Type of school
 Primary 1.00 (reference) 0.045
 Secondary 1.27 (1.01, 1.61)
People with epilepsy in family/social environment
 Yes 1.00 (reference) <0.001
 No 1.57 (1.18, 2.65)
Students with epilepsy in the classroom
 Yes 1.00 (reference) 0.002
 No 1.45 (1.05, 2.00)
Witnessed an epileptic seizure
 Yes 1.00 (reference) 0.001
 No 1.19 (1.17, 1.91)
Attitudes3
 Positive (<29) 1.00 (reference)
 Negative (≥29) 1.36 (1.25, 1.94) <0.001
HL4
 Adequate (≥32) 1.00 (reference)
 Limited (<32) 1.92 (2.11, 3.28) <0.001

OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; EAT, epilepsy attitudes; HL, health literacy.

1 Multiple logistic regression: dependent variable (0 for ≥5 median awareness score: high and 1 for <5 median awareness score: low); Factors: EAT and HL; Covariates: socio-demographic characteristics, people with epilepsy in their family/social life or classroom, witnessed an epileptic seizure.

2 Chi-square test.

3 Attitude score was divided into positive (<29 points) and negative (≥29 points).

4 HL score was divided into adequate (≥32 points) and limited (<32 points).

  • 1. World Health Organization. Epilepsy: a public health imperative. 2019 [cited 2023 Jul 19]. Available from: https://www.ilae.org/files/dmfile/19053_Epilepsy_A-public-health-imperative-For-Web.pdf
  • 2. Kocatürk İ, Özdemir G. A study on the prevalance of epilepsy in the provincial enter of Erzurum. Turk J Neurol 2019;25: 7-11
  • 3. Canpolat M, Per H, Gumus H, Elmali F, Kumandas S. Investigating the prevalence of febrile convulsion in Kayseri, Turkey: an assessment of the risk factors for recurrence of febrile convulsion and for development of epilepsy. Seizure 2018;55: 36-47ArticlePubMed
  • 4. Alkhamees HA, Selai CE, Shorvon SD. The beliefs among patients with epilepsy in Saudi Arabia about the causes and treatment of epilepsy and other aspects. Epilepsy Behav 2015;53: 135-139ArticlePubMed
  • 5. Kasper DL, Fauci AS, Hauser SL, Longo DL, Jameson J, Loscalzo J. Harrison’s manual of medicine. 19th ed. New York: McGrawHill Education; 2016. p. 1218
  • 6. Lim KS, Wu C, Choo WY, Tan CT. Development and validation of a public attitudes toward epilepsy (PATE) scale. Epilepsy Behav 2012;24(2):207-212ArticlePubMed
  • 7. Abbasi Kangevari M, Kolahi AA, Farsar AR, Kermaniranjbar S. Public awareness, attitudes, and first-aid measures on epilepsy in Tehran. Iran J Child Neurol 2019;13(1):91-106
  • 8. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on the Public Health Dimensions of the Epilepsies. Epilepsy across the spectrum: promoting health and understanding. Washington, DC: National Academies Press (US); 2012. PMID: 22993876
  • 9. Sørensen K, Van den Broucke S, Fullam J, Doyle G, Pelikan J, Slonska Z, et al. Health literacy and public health: a systematic review and integration of definitions and models. BMC Public Health 2012;12: 80PubMedPMC
  • 10. Nutbeam D, Jane E. Understanding and responding to health literacy as a social determinant of health. Annu Rev Public Health 2021;42: 159-173ArticlePubMed
  • 11. Denuwara H, Gunawardena NS. Level of health literacy and factors associated with it among school teachers in an education zone in Colombo, Sri Lanka. BMC Public Health 2017;17(1):631ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 12. Asadian A, Sotoudeh A, Venovel M, Moosai R. Investigating health literacy of teachers in Asaluyeh. Soc Behav Res Health 2018;2(2):218-224ArticlePDF
  • 13. Yilmazel G, Cetinkaya F. Health literacy among schoolteachers in Çorum, Turkey. East Mediterr Health J 2015;21(8):598-605ArticlePubMed
  • 14. van der Heide I, Poureslami I, Mitic W, Shum J, Rootman I, FitzGerald JM. Health literacy in chronic disease management: a matter of interaction. J Clin Epidemiol 2018;102: 134-138ArticlePubMed
  • 15. Sudhakar S, Aebi ME, Burant CJ, Wilson B, Wenk J, Briggs FB, et al. Health literacy and education level correlates of participation and outcome in a remotely delivered epilepsy self-management program. Epilepsy Behav 2020;107: 107026ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 16. Tschamper MK, Wahl AK, Hermansen Å, Jakobsen R, Larsen MH. Parents of children with epilepsy: characteristics associated with high and low levels of health literacy. Epilepsy Behav 2022;130: 108658ArticlePubMed
  • 17. Elhassan MA, Alemairy AA, Amara ZM, Hamadelneel AA, Mohamed AH, Elaimeri AA. Epilepsy: knowledge, attitude, and practice among secondary school teachers in Khartoum State. Neurol Ther 2017;6(2):225-235ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 18. Okyay P, Abacıgil F. Türkiye health literacy scales reliability and validity study. 2016 [cited 2023 Jul 19]. Available from: https://toad.halileksi.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/avrupa-saglik-okuryazarligi-olcegi-toad.pdf (Turkish)
  • 19. Aktürk T, Tanık N, Saçmacı H, Chia ZJ, Lim KS. Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of Public Attitudes Toward Epilepsy scale. Epilepsy Behav 2020;111: 107245ArticlePubMed
  • 20. HLS-EU Consortium. Comparative report of health literacy in eight EU member states (second extended and revised version). 2012 [cited 2023 Jul 19]. Available from: http://www.healthliteracy.eu
  • 21. Abacıgil F, Harlak H, Okyay P. Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the European Health Literacy Survey Questionnaire. Health Promot Int 2019;34(4):658-667ArticlePubMed
  • 22. Ucer H, Sucakli MH, Celik M, Keten HS. Primary school teachers’ knowledge, attitudes and behaviors about childhood epilepsy. Cukurova Med J 2016;41(3):491-497. (Turkish)
  • 23. Kampra M, Tzerakis NG, Losidis S, Katsarou E, Voudris K, Mastroyianni S, et al. Teachers’ knowledge about epilepsy in Greece: information sources and attitudes towards children with epilepsy during school time. Epilepsy Behav 2016;60: 218-224ArticlePubMed
  • 24. Okumura A, Saitoh S, Natsume J, Yamamoto H, Kurahashi H, Numoto S. Attitudes of school teachers toward epilepsy in Nagoya, Japan. Epilepsy Behav 2020;103(Pt A):106359ArticlePubMed
  • 25. Al-Hashemi E, Ashkanani A, Al-Qattan H, Mahmoud A, Al-Kabbani M, Al-Juhaidli A, et al. Knowledge about epilepsy and attitudes toward students with epilepsy among middle and high school teachers in Kuwait. Int J Pediatr 2016;2016: 5138952ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 26. Alkhambra H, Tannous A, Hadidi M, Alkhateeb J. Knowledge and attitudes toward epilepsy among school teachers and counselors in Jordan. Epilepsy Behav 2012;24(4):430-434ArticlePubMed
  • 27. Alkhotani AM. Teachers and epilepsy in Saudi Arabia: gaps in knowledge and potential roles. Int J Gen Med 2022;15: 795-801ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 28. Janati Idrissi A, Lamkaddem A, Boujraf S, Souirti Z. Awareness and attitudes toward persons with epilepsy among teachers: a Moroccan study. Epilepsy Behav 2020;102: 106633ArticlePubMed
  • 29. Alamri S, Al Thobaity A. Teachers and epilepsy: what they know, do not know, and need to know: a cross-sectional study of Taif City. J Family Med Prim Care 2020;9(6):2704-2709ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 30. Sansa E, Fray S, Jamoussi H, Chebbi S, Ben Mahmoud M, Ben Ali N, et al. Knowledge and attitudes toward epilepsy among teachers in Tunisia. Epilepsy Behav 2021;123: 108260ArticlePubMed
  • 31. Assadeck H, Toudou Daouda M, Moussa Konate M, Mamadou Z, Douma Maiga D, Sanoussi S. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices with respect to epilepsy among primary and secondary school teachers in the city of Niamey, Niger. Brain Behav 2020;10(3):e01539ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 32. Denuwara HM, Gunawardena NS. Level of health literacy and factors associated with it among school teachers in an education zone in Colombo, Sri Lanka. BMC Public Health 2017;17(1):631ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 33. Lamanauskas V, Augienė D. Identifying primary school teachers’ health literacy. J Turk Sci Educ 2019;16(4):451-466Article
  • 34. Ahmadi F, Montazeri A. Health literacy of pre-service teachers from Farhangian University: a cross-sectional survey. Int J Sch Health 2019;6(2):1-5Article
  • 35. Lau SS, Shum EN, Man JO, Cheung ET, Amoah PA, Leung AY, et al. Assessing COVID-19-related health literacy and associated factors among school teachers in Hong Kong, China. Front Public Health 2022;10: 1057782ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 36. Karimi N, Heidari M. Knowledge and attitudes toward epilepsy among school teachers in West of Iran. Iran J Neurol 2015;14(3):130-135PubMedPMC
  • 37. Aaberg KM, Gunnes N, Bakken IJ, Søraas CL, Berntsen A, Magnus P, et al. Incidence and prevalence of childhood epilepsy: a nationwide cohort study. Pediatrics 2017;139(5):e20163908ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 38. Alamri S, Alghamdi A, Al Quiet A. What Saudi teachers know about epilepsy: a cross-sectional study of Tabuk City. Epilepsy Behav 2018;89: 169-172ArticlePubMed
  • 39. Alqahtani JM. Knowledge and practice of schoolteachers towards students with epilepsy in Khamis Mushate, Southern Saudi Arabia. J Family Community Med 2015;22(3):163-168ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 40. Jones C, Atkinson P, Cross JH, Reilly C. Knowledge of and attitudes towards epilepsy among teachers: a systematic review. Epilepsy Behav 2018;87: 59-68ArticlePubMed

Figure & Data

References

    Citations

    Citations to this article as recorded by  

      Figure

      JPMPH : Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health