ࡱ >
\ p None B a = c @ = Z ?N*8 X" 1 Arial1 Arial1 Arial1 Arial1 Arial1 Arial1 Arial General ` V
Table_1 t Urban Rural Survey 1 (N = 500), n (%) Survey 2 (N = 549), n (%) p value Survey 1 (N = 308), n (%) Survey 2 (N = 300), n (%) Mean STAI scores 1.8 2.0 <0.01 1.9 1.7 Worry about H7N91 3.8 4.8 4.2 5.7 Perceived absolutesusceptibility2 0.07 High 9 (2.6) 23 (4.3) 1 (0.3) 45 (16.3) Even 98 (21.1) 99 (18.1) 41 (13.0) 80 (25.2) Low
393 (76.4)
427 (77.6)
266 (86.7)
175 (58.4) Perceived relative susceptibility3 5 (0.7) 18 (3.8) 28 (10.4) 52 (11.2) 37 (6.1) 25 (7.1) 93 (32.9)
443 (88.2)
494 (90.1)
282 (92.6)
179 (56.7) ILI symptoms induced worry4 More
151 (29.8)
244 (41.0) 79 (25.0)
150 (52.6)
Same as usual
198 (41.0)
170 (32.2)
113 (34.9) 77 (25.0) Less
151 (29.2)
135 (26.8)
116 (40.1) 73 (22.4) Infection with H7N9 in the past week5 Worry 68 (14.2)
139 (23.7) 76 (25.4)
144 (50.4) Think about it but no worry 57 (9.9)
135 (24.0) 42 (12.9) 40 (12.0) Never think about it
375 (75.9)
275 (52.3)
190 (61.6)
116 (37.6) Relative severity of H7N96 Compared to seasonal flu
319 (65.6)
304 (51.9)
181 (56.8)
204 (71.9) 0.02 Compared to H5N1 avian flu
163 (32.5)
237 (42.5)
112 (34.1)
163 (60.2) Compared to SARS 57 (10.8)
113 (21.4) 63 (19.4) 34 (10.8)* Knowledge towards H7N9 transmission Contact poultry in LPMs
404 (80.8)
382 (69.1)
232 (73.1)
247 (84.3) 0.88 Contact H7N9 patients
261 (51.6)
332 (60.3) 0.01
198 (62.1)
278 (92.4)" Contact virus-contaminated objects
378 (77.3)
408 (74.4) 0.75
225 (70.9)
292 (97.2)
d MbP?_ % * + &P &F