Skip to main content
PLOS ONE logoLink to PLOS ONE
. 2022 Jan 21;17(1):e0262827. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0262827

Knowledge, attitude, and practice related to the COVID-19 pandemic among undergraduate medical students in Indonesia: A nationwide cross-sectional study

Imam Adli 1, Indah Suci Widyahening 2,*, Gilbert Lazarus 1, Jason Phowira 1, Lyanna Azzahra Baihaqi 1, Bagas Ariffandi 1, Azis Muhammad Putera 1, David Nugraha 3, Nico Gamalliel 1, Ardi Findyartini 4,5
Editor: Muhammad Junaid Farrukh6
PMCID: PMC8782366  PMID: 35061848

Abstract

Introduction

The potential role of medical students in raising awareness during public health emergencies has been acknowledged. To further explore their potentials as public educators and role models for the communities during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, this study aims to assess the knowledge, attitude, and practice of these students toward COVID-19.

Methods

An online cross-sectional survey was conducted among undergraduate medical students in Indonesia. Socio-demographics characteristics, social interaction history, information-seeking behavior, as well as knowledge, attitude, and practice toward COVID-19 were collected through a self-reported questionnaire. A p-value of <0.05 indicated statistical significance.

Results

Out of 4870 respondents, 64.9% had positive attitude and 51.5% had positive practice toward COVID-19, while only 29.8% had adequate knowledge. Knowledge was slightly positively correlated with attitude and practice (ρ = 0.074 and ρ = 0.054, respectively; both p<0.001), while attitude was weakly correlated with practice (ρ = 0.234, p<0.001). Several factors including age, sex, place of residence, institution type, academic level, family income, history of chronic illness, prior volunteering experience, and perceptual awareness on COVID-19 were significantly associated with either knowledge, attitude, and/or practice toward COVID-19. Furthermore, health institution’s and the government’s press releases, as well as health expert opinions were deemed as the most reliable sources of COVID-19-related information–yet trivially none of these sources were associated with knowledge, attitude, and practice in the study population.

Conclusion

Many undergraduate medical students in Indonesia had positive attitude and practice against COVID-19, yet only a few had adequate knowledge. This warrants further interventions to keep them updated with COVID-19 evidence to maximize their potentials in raising public awareness on COVID-19.

Introduction

Since the declaration of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a pandemic in early 2020 [1], global communities have strived to implement various strategies in mitigating the devastating disease burden caused by the virus. In Indonesia, the government has prompted several unprecedented measures to control the spread of the disease [2], including implementing large-scale social distancing, increasing the capacity of COVID-19 diagnostic tests, and launching a national research consortium to accelerate innovations to combat the disease [3, 4]. Despite these, the COVID-19 disease spread remains concerning as the number of cases and deaths resulting from the disease has perpetually surged–rendering Indonesia as the hardest-hit country in the region [2]. This may partly be attributable to the fact that COVID-19 literacy among Indonesian population is still poor [5, 6]. Although a previous study revealed that Indonesian population has had positive behaviors toward COVID-19 prevention, some of the essential preventive measures were still lacking, especially in terms of social distancing, self-isolation, maintenance of healthy lifestyle, and health-seeking behavior [5]. This indicated that further strategies to increase the public’s awareness and preventive behaviors on COVID-19 are imperative, in which medical students may provide unyielding support by taking part in raising awareness on COVID-19.

The role of medical students in raising awareness during public health emergencies have long been established. A systematic review by Martin et al revealed that medical students have been involved in public health campaigns during previous viral outbreaks, including human immunodeficiency virus, influenza, severe acute respiratory syndrome, and Ebola [7]. Being perceived as having a higher level of health literacy, medical students may serve as role models for the public to adopt COVID-19 preventive health behaviors. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Indonesian medical students have also taken part in disseminating health information to the public, mainly through the use of social media and news outlets [8]. However, as the disease burden of COVID-19 in Indonesia persists despite rigorous efforts, comprehensive assessments of medical students’ knowledge, attitude, and practice are imperative to further enhance their potentials in educating the public. Specifically, this may provide crucial information for stakeholders to identify field gaps and devise strategies to further encourage communities to follow health standards. Furthermore, this information may also be utilized by medical institutions to improve the medical curricula to prepare for future outbreaks. Therefore, this study aims to assess the knowledge, attitude, and practice of Indonesian undergraduate medical students toward the COVID-19 disease.

Methods

Study design and population

A cross-sectional survey among undergraduate medical students in Indonesia was conducted from 13 July to 11 October 2020. Participants were recruited using a snowball sampling technique and all data were collected via an online self-reported questionnaire using Google Forms (http://forms.google.com/) as the data collection period coincided with implementation of the COVID-19 lockdown policy in Indonesia. The questionnaire was filled anonymously, voluntarily, and with written consent given by all respondents. To avoid duplicate responses, all participants were required to log into their email accounts, but any personal contact information were not recorded to protect the anonymity of the respondents. During the data collection period, the questionnaire was spread using social media platforms every three days to increase the number of respondents. All procedures conducted in this study have been approved by the Health Research Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Medicine Universitas Indonesia and Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital (ethical clearance number: 758/UN2.F1/ETIK/PPM.00.02/2020).

Measurement tools

The questionnaire was developed through literature searches of previously validated questionnaires [912], which was then translated to Bahasa Indonesia through backward and forward translations by three of the authors (GL, IA and AMP), and modified to match the context of the study. A preliminary survey was then conducted on 30 participants to enhance the comprehension and the validity of the questionnaire. Further details on the calculation of minimum sample size and the development of the questionnaire have been previously discussed elsewhere [13].

The questionnaire encompassed four primary sections including: (1) socio-demographics characteristics, (2) social interaction history, (3) levels of trust in COVID-19 health information sources, and (4) knowledge, attitude, and practice. Socio-demographics characteristics consisted of age, sex, place of residence, institution type, academic level, living circumstances, marital status, family income, and history of chronic diseases. Living circumstances comprised the number of people living in the household and type of household (e.g., family, non-family, or alone), while family income was classified as low, lower-middle, upper-middle, and high-income class for monthly family income of ≤ IDR 1,500,000, IDR 1,500,001–2,500,000, IDR 2,500,001–3,500,000, and >IDR 3,500,000, respectively [14]. On the other hand, the social interaction history section aimed to assess the volunteering experience of respondents in health and non-health sectors, their own and family’s COVID-19 disease history, and their history of physical contacts with COVID-19 patients. In addition, we also assessed the medical students’ general perception on the reliability of various health information sources, including televisions, newspapers, online news, social media, official statements from the government and health institutions, and expert opinions.

The final section aimed to investigate the participants’ knowledge, attitude, and practice toward the COVID-19 disease. Knowledge was assessed using a 10-items questionnaire encompassing various areas of COVID-19 disease, including pathogenesis, clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. Each correct answer accounts for one point with a maximum score of 10 points. In contrast, assessment of attitude and practice consisted of 12 questions each using a five-point Likert scale. Higher knowledge, attitudinal, and behavioral scores indicated favorable perceptions. Lastly, the reliability of the questionnaire was appraised using Cronbach’s alpha, with a coefficient for knowledge, attitude, and practice of 0.655, 0.726, 0.807, respectively, indicating satisfactory internal reliability [15].

Statistical analysis

Submitted responses were collected in and managed with the MS Excel® for Office 365 MSO ver. 2002 (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, 2018). Subsequently, data were analyzed using SPSS 24.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) and visualized using R ver. 4.0.3 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) [16]. Categorical data were presented as frequency and percentages, while continuous data as means or medians along with the appropriate measure of dispersion according to the normality of data distribution as tested with Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests.

Outcomes on the knowledge, attitude, and practice were dichotomized according to the Bloom’s cut-off (≥80%) [17], where a sum knowledge score of ≥8 indicated adequacy, and a score of ≥48 indicated positive attitude and practice, respectively. Potential factors associated with the dependent variables were first analyzed using univariate logistic regression. Any factors associated with each outcome at p≤0.20 were deemed eligible for inclusion in the multivariate analysis. In addition, correlation between trust in health information sources and knowledge, attitude, and practice, as well as intercorrelations among the dependent variables were investigated with Spearman’s rho (ρ). A p-value of <0.05 denoted statistical significance.

Results

Out of 4870 participants with a median age of 20 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 19–21), 3399 (69.8%) were female and 3925 (80.6%) were pre-clinical students. Most participants resided in Java (86.9%), followed by Eastern Indonesia (6.0%), Sumatra (4.9%), and Central Indonesia (2.1%). Further details on the characteristics of the included participants can be seen on S1 Table.

Knowledge, attitude, and practice toward COVID-19

We discovered that about 64.9% and 51.5% respondents yielded positive attitude and practice toward COVID-19, while only 29.8% yielded adequate knowledge score. Most of the participants were knowledgeable in the prevention (97.1%), respiratory transmission (96.4%), clinical and radiological findings (83.9% and 80.8%), and therapeutic aspects of COVID-19 (83.3%). However, low numbers of correct answers were found in questions related to the laboratory findings (31.8%), zoonotic transmission route of SARS-CoV-2 (31.8%), and the differences in clinical manifestations between COVID-19 and common cold (57.1%; S2 Table). Furthermore, only 16.1% of the participants correctly answered the incubation period of SARS-CoV-2. In addition, a considerable number of participants believed that the communities’ awareness on COVID-19 were still lacking (37.0%) and disagreed that COVID-19 patients could be treated at home (22.5%). Item-specific responses of the attitude and practice of Indonesian medical students toward COVID-19 can be seen on S3 and S4 Tables, respectively.

In this study, we found that the correlation between knowledge with attitude and practice was negligible (ρ = 0.074 and ρ = 0.054, respectively; both p<0.001). Attitude was also weakly correlated with practice (ρ = 0.234, p<0.001; Fig 1). Our findings indicated that female (OR 1.22 [95% CI: 1.06–1.40], p = 0.006) and students with an older age were more likely to demonstrate a higher level of knowledge (OR 1.06 [95% CI: 1.00–1.12], p = 0.034; Table 1). Furthermore, students attending public institutions had a higher knowledge score than those attending private institutions (OR 1.32 [95% CI: 1.15–1.50], p<0.001). We also found that clinical-year students (OR 1.66 [95% CI: 1.35–2.04], p<0.001) and students with prior volunteering experience, either in health sectors (OR 1.26 [95% CI: 1.07–1.49], p = 0.007) or non-health sectors (OR 1.33 [95% CI: 1.15–1.52], p<0.001), were associated with higher knowledge scores. Students with a history of chronic illness also had a higher knowledge score (OR 1.33 [95% CI: 1.04–1.70], p = 0.022). In contrast, students living in Sumatra and Eastern Indonesia had significantly lower knowledge scores relative to those living in Java (OR 0.73 [95% CI: 0.54–0.99], p = 0.044; and OR 0.73 [95% CI: 0.55–0.97], p = 0.028, respectively).

Fig 1. Correlation between knowledge, attitude, and practice toward COVID-19 in the study population.

Fig 1

***p<0.001.

Table 1. Factors associated with knowledge on COVID-19 in the study population (n = 4870).

Variable Univariate Multivariate
OR 95% CI P-value OR 95% CI P-value
Age (years) 1.17 1.13, 1.22 <0.001 1.06 1.00, 1.12 0.034
Sex
    Female 1.19 1.04, 1.36 0.013 1.22 1.06, 1.40 0.006
    Male ref ref
Location
    Sumatra 0.86 0.64, 1.16 0.319 0.73 0.54, 0.99 0.044
    Central Indonesiaa 1.48 0.99, 2.21 0.057 1.41 0.93, 2.12 0.103
    Eastern Indonesiab 0.88 0.67, 1.15 0.338 0.73 0.55, 0.97 0.028
    Java ref ref
Institution type
    Public 1.29 1.14, 1.46 <0.001 1.32 1.15, 1.50 <0.001
    Private ref ref
Academic level
    Clinical 2.06 1.78, 2.39 <0.001 1.66 1.35, 2.04 <0.001
    Pre-clinical ref ref
Living withc
    Alone 1.12 0.94, 1.34 0.202
    Non-family 1.08 0.62, 1.89 0.795
    Family ref
Number of housemate (people)c 1.01 0.99, 1.03 0.313
Living with children
    Yes 0.95 0.84, 1.07 0.401
    No ref
Living with elderly
    Yes 1.14 0.99, 1.32 0.070 1.14 0.98, 1.32 0.084
    No ref ref
Marital status
    Married 0.94 0.37, 2.43 0.901
    Divorced 2.35 0.15, 37.67 0.545
    Not married ref
Family income
    ≤ IDR 1,500,000 1.01 0.76, 1.33 0.975
    IDR 1,500,001–2,500,000 0.84 0.64, 1.11 0.229
    IDR 2,500,001–3,500,000 0.92 0.75, 1.12 0.414
    > IDR 3,500,000 ref
History of chronic illness
    Yes 1.40 1.10, 1.77 0.006 1.33 1.04, 1.70 0.022
    No ref ref
Volunteered in health sectors
    Yes 1.60 1.37, 1.86 <0.001 1.26 1.07, 1.49 0.007
    No ref ref
Volunteered in non-health sectors
    Yes 1.43 1.25, 1.63 <0.001 1.33 1.15, 1.52 <0.001
    No ref ref
Family members diagnosed with COVID-19
    Don’t know 0.83 0.69, 1.00 0.047 0.87 0.71, 1.07 0.180
    Yes 1.16 0.93, 1.45 0.184 1.05 0.82, 1.34 0.698
    No ref ref
Contacts with COVID-19 patients
    Don’t know 0.88 0.75, 1.02 0.083 0.91 0.77, 1.07 0.254
    Yes 1.68 1.23, 2.31 0.001 1.36 0.96, 1.93 0.086
    No ref ref
Had been a COVID-19 patient
    Don’t know 0.89 0.75, 1.05 0.152 0.89 0.74, 1.06 0.192
    Yesd 1.15 0.56, 2.39 0.669 0.85 0.39, 1.86 0.691
    No ref ref

Texts in bold indicate statistical significance.

aIncludes Sulawesi and Kalimantan.

bIncludes Bali, Nusa Tenggara, Maluku, and Papua.

cDefined as the people living with the respondents at the time of questionnaire completion.

dIncludes both confirmed and unconfirmed (suspected or probable) cases. CI, confidence interval; COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019; IDR, Indonesian Rupiah; OR, odds ratio.

Consistent with our findings in the knowledge section, students with prior volunteering experience in either health or non-health sectors yielded higher attitude and practice scores (health sectors: OR 1.19 [95% CI: 1.00–1.41], p = 0.045 and OR 1.25 [95% CI: 1.07–1.47], p = 0.006; non-health sectors: OR 1.25 [95% CI: 1.10–1.41], p = 0.001 and OR 1.16 [95% CI: 1.03–1.31], p = 0.019; Tables 2 and 3, respectively). Furthermore, female students also had better practice (OR 1.46 [95% CI: 1.28–1.65], p<0.001). However, contrary to our findings in the knowledge section, we discovered that students in public universities had a relatively lower practice score compared students in private universities (OR 0.71 [95% CI: 0.63–0.80], p<0.001). Students from lower-middle income class also had lower practice scores relative to that of students from high income class (OR 0.69 [95% CI: 0.54–0.89], p = 0.004; Table 3). In addition, we also found that students whose family members had been infected by COVID-19 had a more positive attitude (OR 1.53 [95% CI: 1.19–1.97], p = 0.001), while conversely students who were unaware of their history of contacts with COVID-19 patients or their history of COVID-19 infection had lower practice scores (OR 0.80 [95% CI: 0.68–0.93], p = 0.003, and OR 0.78 [95% CI: 0.66–0.92], p = 0.003, respectively)

Table 2. Factors associated with attitude toward COVID-19 in the study population (n = 4870).

Variable Univariate Multivariate
OR 95% CI P-value OR 95% CI P-value
Age (years) 1.05 1.01, 1.09 0.018 1.04 0.98, 1.09 0.196
Sex
    Female 0.96 0.84, 1.09 0.492
    Male ref
Location
    Sumatra 0.99 0.76, 1.31 0.967 0.92 0.69, 1.22 0.547
    Central Indonesiaa 1.00 0.66, 1.50 0.990 0.93 0.62, 1.42 0.749
    Eastern Indonesiab 0.84 0.66, 1.07 0.151 0.83 0.64, 1.07 0.144
    Java ref ref
Institution type
    Public 1.11 0.99, 1.25 0.086 1.12 0.98, 1.23 0.093
    Private ref ref
Academic level
    Clinical 1.16 1.00, 1.35 0.050 1.00 0.81, 1.23 0.979
    Pre-clinical ref ref
Living withc
    Alone 0.92 0.78, 1.09 0.338
    Non-family 1.02 0.59, 1.75 0.953
    Family ref
Number of housemate (people)c 1.02 0.99, 1.04 0.177 1.02 0.99, 1.04 0.190
Living with children
    Yes 1.04 0.92, 1.16 0.577
    No ref
Living with elderly
    Yes 1.06 0.92, 1.22 0.415
    No ref
Marital status
    Married 1.36 0.53, 3.50 0.530
    Divorced NE NE 0.999
    Not married ref
Family income
    ≤ IDR 1,500,000 1.01 0.77, 1.33 0.930 1.03 0.77, 1.36 0.865
    IDR 1,500,001–2,500,000 0.68 0.53, 0.87 0.002 0.70 0.54, 0.89 0.005
    IDR 2,500,001–3,500,000 0.89 0.73, 1.07 0.207 0.91 0.75, 1.10 0.328
    > IDR 3,500,000 ref ref
History of chronic illness
    Yes 1.05 0.82, 1.33 0.719
    No ref
Volunteered in health sectors
    Yes 1.34 1.14, 1.57 <0.001 1.19 1.00, 1.41 0.045
    No ref ref
Volunteered in non-health sectors
    Yes 1.28 1.14, 1.45 <0.001 1.25 1.10, 1.41 0.001
    No ref ref
Family members diagnosed with COVID-19
    Don’t know 1.01 0.85, 1.20 0.909 1.00 0.83, 1.20 0.974
    Yes 1.63 1.29, 2.07 <0.001 1.53 1.19, 1.97 0.001
    No ref ref
Contacts with COVID-19 patients
    Don’t know 1.03 0.89, 1.19 0.674 0.97 0.83, 1.14 0.726
    Yes 1.65 1.15, 2.35 0.006 1.34 0.91, 1.98 0.137
    No ref ref
Had been a COVID-19 patient
    Don’t know 1.15 0.99, 1.35 0.077 1.13 0.95, 1.34 0.174
    Yesd 0.97 0.48, 1.98 0.933 0.60 0.28, 1.27 0.182
    No ref ref

Texts in bold indicate statistical significance.

aIncludes Sulawesi and Kalimantan.

bIncludes Bali, Nusa Tenggara, Maluku, and Papua.

cDefined as the people living with the respondents at the time of questionnaire completion.

dIncludes both confirmed and unconfirmed (suspected or probable) cases. CI, confidence interval; COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019; IDR, Indonesian Rupiah; NE, not estimable; OR, odds ratio.

Table 3. Factors associated with practice toward COVID-19 in the study population (n = 4870).

Variable Univariate Multivariate
OR 95% CI P-value OR 95% CI P-value
Age (years) 1.04 1.00, 1.08 0.036 1.01 0.96, 1.07 0.626
Sex
    Female 1.47 1.30, 1.67 <0.001 1.46 1.28, 1.65 <0.001
    Male ref ref
Location
    Sumatra 1.07 0.82, 1.39 0.631
    Central Indonesiaa 0.79 0.53, 1.17 0.235
    Eastern Indonesiab 0.97 0.76, 1.22 0.772
    Java ref
Institution type
    Public 0.72 0.64, 0.81 <0.001 0.71 0.63, 0.80 <0.001
    Private ref ref
Academic level
    Clinical 1.15 0.99, 1.32 0.060 1.07 0.88, 1.31 0.479
    Pre-clinical ref ref
Living withc
    Alone 1.08 0.91, 1.27 0.386
    Non-family 0.77 0.46, 1.30 0.323
    Family ref
Number of housemate (people)c 1.01 0.99, 1.03 0.329
Living with children
    Yes 1.01 0.90, 1.13 0.870
    No ref
Living with elderly
    Yes 0.99 0.86, 1.12 0.825
    No ref
Marital status
    Married 1.89 0.76, 4.68 0.172 1.83 0.73, 4.62 0.200
    Divorced 0.94 0.06, 15.08 0.967 0.90 0.06, 14.65 0.941
    Not married ref ref
Family income
    ≤ IDR 1,500,000 0.99 0.76, 1.29 0.946 1.00 0.76, 1.30 0.973
    IDR 1,500,001–2,500,000 0.71 0.56, 0.91 0.007 0.69 0.54, 0.89 0.004
    IDR 2,500,001–3,500,000 0.98 0.82, 1.17 0.797 0.99 0.82, 1.19 0.888
    > IDR 3,500,000 ref ref
History of chronic illness
    Yes 0.94 0.75, 1.18 0.571
    No ref
Volunteered in health sectors
    Yes 1.30 1.12, 1.50 0.001 1.25 1.07, 1.47 0.006
    No ref ref
Volunteered in non-health sectors
    Yes 1.21 1.08, 1.36 0.001 1.16 1.03, 1.31 0.019
    No ref ref
Family members diagnosed with COVID-19
    Don’t know 0.76 0.65, 0.90 0.002 0.90 0.75, 1.07 0.236
    Yes 1.08 0.88, 1.34 0.457 1.08 0.86, 1.36 0.493
    No ref ref
Contacts with COVID-19 patients
    Don’t know 0.71 0.62, 0.82 <0.001 0.80 0.68, 0.93 0.003
    Yes 1.35 0.98, 1.85 0.065 1.26 0.89, 1.78 0.200
    No ref ref
Had been a COVID-19 patient
    Don’t know 0.67 0.58, 0.78 <0.001 0.78 0.66, 0.92 0.003
    Yesd 1.76 0.85, 3.64 0.126 1.54 0.72, 3.30 0.263
    No ref ref

Texts in bold indicate statistical significance.

aIncludes Sulawesi and Kalimantan.

bIncludes Bali, Nusa Tenggara, Maluku, and Papua.

cDefined as the people living with the respondents at the time of questionnaire completion.

dIncludes both confirmed and unconfirmed (suspected or probable) cases. CI, confidence interval; COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019; IDR, Indonesian Rupiah; OR, odds ratio.

Levels of trust toward COVID-19 health information sources

In addition to the knowledge, attitude, and practice toward COVID-19, we also explored the study population’s levels of trust toward COVID-19-related national health information sources. We discovered that most of the participants considered that health information released by health institutions (89.3%), health experts (78.0%), and the government (70.8%) to be reliable. In contrast, only 26.0% and 12.7% of the participants deemed online news and media social to be trustworthy (Fig 2). Nearly half of the participants also trusted the health information broadcasted by television and newspaper outlets (45.8% and 44.3%, respectively). No robust correlations could be established between trust in specific health information sources and the students’ knowledge, attitude, or practice. Although the negative association between trust in social media and the students’ knowledge was statistically significant, the magnitude of the correlation was clinically negligible (ρ = -0.040; p = 0.005; S5 Table).

Fig 2. Levels of trust of the study population toward COVID-19 health information released by various media outlet.

Fig 2

Discussion

Medical education primarily aims to inculcate medical students’ high-quality skills and competence in preparing them as future healthcare professionals. In a global health crisis, medical students play a pivotal role in raising public awareness, which in turn may contribute to successful emergency management by mitigating risks, supporting preventive measures, and minimizing negative psychological burdens [18]. To maximize the potentials of these students in educating the communities, it is thus important to explore their knowledge, attitude, and practice toward COVID-19. The present cross-sectional study showed that a majority of Indonesian medical students had a positive attitude and practice against COVID-19. However, this number was not accompanied by a proportionate number of students with adequate knowledge, indicating the urgent need to take active measures to keep these students updated with COVID-19-related evidence.

In the present study, female medical students were superior to males in terms of knowledge and practice. This finding is further validated by a meta-analysis demonstrating that women were 49.5% more likely to practice and adopt health-protective behaviors in the context of a pandemic outbreak [19]. Our study also revealed that a higher percentage of students from public medical schools demonstrated adequate knowledge towards COVID-19, while medical students from private institutions reported a higher level of practice. Although these results may have noted the importance of embedding and promoting equality between public and private medical institutions as well as between fellow public or private medical institutions themselves in terms of the medical curriculum adopted and opportunities to practice clinical skills, these findings should be interpreted cautiously, especially considering the complex interrelationship between the explored variables.

One of the most apparent findings to emerge from the analysis was that medical students in clinical years yielded higher knowledge scores compared to pre-clinical students. This result may be explained by the fact that medical students in their final years have been exposed to more experiences and learning opportunities in clinical setup, thereby offering a vast wealth of potential to help and contribute to the pandemic response. With the rigorous years of clinical training they have undergone, qualified clinical-year medical students may therefore contribute beyond being public educators by volunteering to clinically assist the healthcare workers in fighting against COVID-19 [20].

Our analysis further validated that voluntary participation, whether in health or non-health sectors, played a major role in determining one’s levels of knowledge, attitude, and practice. In response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, a plethora of volunteering efforts has been established and launched. Willingness to volunteer has been demonstrated to be higher in those who establish preparedness behavior and exhibit higher awareness of responsibility [13]. In addition, depending on the role and scope, volunteering might offer the opportunities to develop relevant knowledge and skills, a positive sense of community, and pro-social behavior [21]. These might explain the higher scores observed in the present survey among medical students with volunteering experience. Accordingly, based on our findings, incremental efforts should more specifically be made by the medical institutions in promoting volunteerism and encouraging more medical students to partake in volunteering opportunities to gain indispensable learning opportunities and collaborate with other healthcare professionals [22].

Additionally, it was also evident from our study that poor practices were demonstrated among respondents who were unsure whether or not they had been in contact with any COVID-19 positive patient or had been infected with COVID-19. This finding might indicate that the lack of awareness surrounding COVID-19 negatively affects one’s level practice. Therefore, a comprehensive approach to increase the awareness of surrounding environment of these students, and in a broader scope–the general population, is urgently required. This may be achieved through rigorous contact tracing, intensive risk communication, as well as mass education efforts [23].

With the exponential technological advancement over the past few decades, social media seems to be the most plausible way to promote public health behavioral change to increase COVID-19 protective measures [24]. However, our findings suggested that trust in social media as a source of COVID-19 health information was inversely associated with favorable practice in the study population. Although the correlation was clinically negligible, this result noted the importance of managing the information flow of social media, as a source of unfiltered and potentially misleading information, while simultaneously protecting one’s freedom of speech. This might be attained by developing algorithms and capabilities to detect fake news, cultivating a standard of conduct in dealing with fake news, and increasing the media literacy and ethical standards of digital users [25]. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that further studies investigating the association between social media and COVID-19 preventive practice among the Indonesian general population are required to confirm our premises as the current study population was confined to medical students. Furthermore, the fact that virtually no other health information sources was significantly associated with the levels of knowledge, attitude, or practice toward COVID-19 in the study population may also indicate that some more influential resources such as scientific articles or medical textbooks, which were unexplored in this study, may impact the overall trend.

Overall, the gaps in knowledge relating to COVID-19 persisted although most respondents in the study demonstrated a high level of attitude and a fair level of practice. These results showed that positive attitude and appropriate practices regarding COVID-19 documented among medical students might suggest their valuable role as role models for the general population. However, as future health professionals, demonstration of high standards of attitude and practice has to be aptly supported by excellence in clinical knowledge and understanding, especially if they are to be involved in global health emergencies. Addressing this knowledge gap will warrant not only a more effective public education but also a safer and more efficient involvement of medical students in public health emergencies beyond their role in raising public awareness [7].

One’s level of knowledge is substantially influenced by an effective and efficient education system that plays a key role in ensuring high-quality teaching and learning. The low level of knowledge reported might be justified by the rapidly evolving COVID-19 evidence [26], which represents an enormous challenge to medical education and thus may subsequently hinder the delivery of educational materials. Our findings necessitate prompt actions by medical institutions to enhance the breadth of knowledge and understanding of Indonesian medical students in regards to COVID-19, particularly with reference to infection prevention and control principles. This was demonstrated by Boodman et al., who described the involvement of medical students in Canada to produce a weekly evidence-based newsletter designed to answer COVID-19 clinical questions raised by doctors. Besides improvements observed in research and inter-professional communication skills among the students, this strategy allowed medical students to gain a deeper understanding of COVID-19 while contributing in a concrete way to the pandemic [27]. In addition, attention should also be paid to gradually allow medical students to engage safely in patient-based training with an appropriate balance of online and in-person learning. In-person activities can be conducted by mitigating the risk of physical contact with patients through physical distancing and suitable personal protective equipment [28].

The findings of our study might be of assistance and applicable for stakeholders and policymakers in designing and transforming existing public health interventions and medical curriculum to equip medical students with the appropriate tools to adapt during a global health crisis. The current pandemic has corroborated the noteworthiness of implementing exhaustive and systematic disaster training programs as part of the medical school curriculum to fight not only the current pandemic but also future unforeseeable global health crises. A key priority should therefore be to plan these dedicated programs to strengthen students’ disaster and pandemic preparedness against similar global health calamities [29].

This study has several strengths and limitations. The relatively large sample size and the wide geographical reach contributed to the strength of the study. Furthermore, the questionnaire had previously been validated and yielded a fair reliability, thus further ascertaining the validity of our findings. However, the study was limited by the unbalanced distribution of pre-clinical and clinical medical students, which could have potentially limited the generalizability of the study results. The generalizability of our findings might also be affected by the constantly evolving evidence on and situation due to COVID-19, thereby implying that the knowledge, attitude, and practice of medical students in Indonesia found in this study may change over time. Moreover, due to the cross-sectional nature of the survey, we were not able to disentangle the directionality of the relationships observed. An additional uncontrolled factor was the possibility that possible confounding variables, which were not scrutinized in this study, might affect our results. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported study assessing the levels of knowledge, attitude, and practice toward the COVID-19 disease among Indonesian medical students, thus providing key parameters for policymakers and institutions in formulating effective strategies and tools to enhance the medical students’ potentials in raising public awareness and protective practices in the current COVID-19 pandemic and prospective potential public health emergencies.

Conclusion

Undergraduate medical students in Indonesia had a considerably positive attitude and practice against COVID-19. However, further interventions are required as these figures were not complemented with a proportionate number of students with adequate knowledge. Such interventions should aim to keep the students updated with COVID-19 evidence and simultaneously providing them with opportunities to contribute to the pandemic as public educators and role models for communities, while also equipping them with appropriate knowledge and skills to prepare for future public health emergencies. In turn, this approach may create a positive feedback loop enhancing the students’ knowledge, attitude, and practice, which were positively intercorrelated in this study.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Characteristics of the study population.

(DOCX)

S2 Table. Item-specific responses on the participants’ knowledge on COVID-19.

(DOCX)

S3 Table. Item-specific responses on the participants’ attitude towards COVID-19.

(DOCX)

S4 Table. Item-specific responses on the participants’ practice towards COVID-19.

(DOCX)

S5 Table. Correlation between the students’ level of trust in health information sources with knowledge, attitude, and practice toward COVID-19.

(DOCX)

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the collaborators of the MEDICO-19 Research Group for their contributions in data collection: Alanis Maryjane Mamahit, An Nahl Aulia Hakim, Astrid Cynthia Latief, Ervin Widyantoro Pramono, Feliani Sanjaya, Felix Kurniawan Adithia, Gabriel Tandecxi, Melisa Canggra, Muhammad Mufaiduddin, Rowaida Putri Anggaily Bian, Yoriska, and Zefo Kiyosi Wibowo. The authors would also like to express their gratitude to Prof. Mohamed Izham Mohamed Ibrahim of the College of Pharmacy, QU Health, Qatar University for the insights in the development of the questionnaire, as well as Mrs. Bira Arnetha and Ms. Sandhita Utami for the support in administering the project. Lastly, the authors would like to thank fellow students and every institutional official for the help in disseminating the questionnaire.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

AF received funding from the Indonesian COVID-19 Research and Innovation Consortium (grant number: 132/FI/P-KCOVID-19.2B3/IX/2020) organized by the Indonesian Ministry of Research and Technology/National Research and Innovation Agency. The funder had no role in the study conception, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Cucinotta D, Vanelli M. WHO declares COVID-19 a pandemic. Acta Biomedica. Mattioli 1885; 2020. pp. 157–160. doi: 10.23750/abm.v91i1.9397 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.World Health Organization. Indonesia: WHO coronavirus disease (COVID-19) dashboard. 2021. [cited 21 Jun 2021]. Available: https://covid19.who.int/region/searo/country/id. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Setiati S, Azwar MK. COVID-19 and Indonesia. Acta Med Indones. 2020;52: 84–89. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Djalante R, Lassa J, Setiamarga D, Sudjatma A, Indrawan M, Haryanto B, et al. Review and analysis of current responses to COVID-19 in Indonesia: Period of January to March 2020. Prog Disaster Sci. 2020;6: 100091. doi: 10.1016/j.pdisas.2020.100091 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Sulistyawati S, Rokhmayanti R, Aji B, Wijayanti SPM, Kurnia Widi Hastuti S, Sukesi TW, et al. Knowledge, attitudes, practices and information needs during the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2021;14: 163–175. doi: 10.2147/RMHP.S288579 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Saefi M, Fauzi A, Kristiana E, Adi WC, Muchson M, Setiawan ME, et al. Survey data of COVID-19-related knowledge, attitude, and practices among indonesian undergraduate students. Data Br. 2020;31: 105855. doi: 10.1016/j.dib.2020.105855 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Martin A, Blom IM, Whyatt G, Shaunak R, Viva MIF, Banerjee L. A rapid systematic review exploring the involvement of medical students in pandemics and other global health emergencies. Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2020; 1–13. doi: 10.1017/dmp.2020.315 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Lazarus G, Mangkuliguna G, Findyartini A. Medical students in Indonesia: An invaluable living gemstone during coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Korean J Med Educ. 2020;32: 237–241. doi: 10.3946/kjme.2020.165 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Olum R, Chekwech G, Wekha G, Nassozi DR, Bongomin F. Coronavirus disease-2019: Knowledge, attitude, and practices of health care workers at Makerere University Teaching Hospitals, Uganda. Front Public Heal. 2020;8: 181. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.00181 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Zhong BL, Luo W, Li HM, Zhang QQ, Liu XG, Li WT, et al. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices towards COVID-19 among chinese residents during the rapid rise period of the COVID-19 outbreak: A quick online cross-sectional survey. Int J Biol Sci. 2020;16: 1745–1752. doi: 10.7150/ijbs.45221 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Erfani A, Shahriarirad R, Ranjbar K, Mirahmadizadeh A, Moghadami M. Knowledge, attitude and practice toward the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak: A population-based survey in Iran. Bull World Health Organ. 2020. doi: 10.2471/BLT.20.251561 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.World Health Organization. Survey tool and guidance: Rapid, simple, flexible behavioural insights on COVID-19–29 July 2020. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2020. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Lazarus G, Findyartini A, Putera AM, Gamalliel N, Nugraha D, Adli I, et al. Willingness to volunteer and readiness to practice of undergraduate medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional survey in Indonesia. BMC Med Educ. 2021;21: 138. doi: 10.1186/s12909-021-02576-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Herlia DD. Analisis konsumsi rumah tangga miskin di Kelurahan Kebonsari Kulon Kecamatan Kanigaran Kota Probolinggo. University of Muhammadiyah Malang. 2017. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Taber KS. The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Res Sci Educ. 2018;48: 1273–1296. doi: 10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2021. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Seid MA, Hussen MS. Knowledge and attitude towards antimicrobial resistance among final year undergraduate paramedical students at University of Gondar, Ethiopia. BMC Infect Dis. 2018;18. doi: 10.1186/s12879-018-3199-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Savoia E, Lin L, Viswanath K. Communications in public health emergency preparedness: A systematic review of the literature. Biosecurity and Bioterrorism. Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.; 2013. pp. 170–184. doi: 10.1089/bsp.2013.0038 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Moran KR, Del Valle SY. A meta-analysis of the association between gender and protective behaviors in response to respiratory epidemics and pandemics. PLoS One. 2016. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0164541 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Drexler R, Hambrecht JM, Oldhafer KJ. Involvement of medical students during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: A cross-sectional survey study. Cureus. 2020;12. doi: 10.7759/cureus.10147 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Eley D. Perceptions of and reflections on volunteering: The impact of community service on citizenship in students. Volunt Action 53 2746. 2003; 27–45. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Sheu LC, Zheng P, Coelho AD, Lin LD, O’Sullivan PS, O’Brien BC, et al. Learning through service: Student perceptions on volunteering at interprofessional hepatitis B student-run clinics. J Cancer Educ. 2011. doi: 10.1007/s13187-010-0142-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Chatterjee R, Bajwa S, Dwivedi D, Kanji R, Ahammed M, Shaw R. COVID-19 risk assessment tool: Dual application of risk communication and risk governance. Prog Disaster Sci. 2020;7: 100109. doi: 10.1016/j.pdisas.2020.100109 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Al-Dmour H, Masa’deh R, Salman A, Abuhashesh M, Al-Dmour R. Influence of social media platforms on public health protection against the COVID-19 pandemic via the mediating effects of public health awareness and behavioral changes: Integrated model. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22. doi: 10.2196/19996 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Hartley K, Vu MK. Fighting fake news in the COVID-19 era: Policy insights from an equilibrium model. Policy Sci. 2020;53: 735–758. doi: 10.1007/s11077-020-09405-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Osuchowski MF, Aletti F, Cavaillon JM, Flohé SB, Giamarellos-Bourboulis EJ, Huber-Lang M, et al. SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19: Evolving reality, global response, knowledge gaps, and opportunities. Shock. 2020;54: 416–437. doi: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000001565 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Boodman C, Lee S, Bullard J. Idle medical students review emerging COVID-19 research. Med Educ Online. 2020. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2020.1770562 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Gordon M, Patricio M, Horne L, Muston A, Alston SR, Pammi M, et al. Developments in medical education in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 63. Medical Teacher. 2020. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2020.1807484 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Ashcroft J, Byrne MHV, Brennan PA, Davies RJ, Davies RJ. Preparing medical students for a pandemic: A systematic review of student disaster training programmes. Postgrad Med J. 2020;0: 1–12. doi: 10.1136/postgradmedj-2020-137906 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Muhammad Junaid Farrukh

26 Oct 2021

PONE-D-21-12734Knowledge, attitude, and practice related to the COVID-19 pandemic among undergraduate medical students in Indonesia: a nationwide cross-sectional studyPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Indah Suci Widyahening,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by 25 December 2021. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Muhammad Junaid Farrukh

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf.

2. Please provide additional details regarding participant consent. In the ethics statement in the Methods and online submission information, please ensure that you have specified (1) whether consent was suitably informed and (2) what type you obtained (for instance, written or verbal). If your study included minors under age 18, state whether you obtained consent from parents or guardians. If the need for consent was waived by the ethics committee, please include this information.

3. Please include additional information regarding the survey or questionnaire used in the study and ensure that you have provided sufficient details that others could replicate the analyses. For instance, if you developed a questionnaire as part of this study and it is not under a copyright more restrictive than CC-BY, please include a copy, in both the original language and English, as Supporting Information.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #2: Partly

Reviewer #3: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #2: Dear Authors,

Please consider my following suggestions to further improve the manuscript:

1. To state any pilot study conducted prior to actual data collection.

2. To state any reminder mechanism to increase the number of participants

3. To state any mechanism to avoid duplicates of response (i.e. from same respondent)

4. To report the overall response rate

5. To state whether or not the data was collected during the lockdown period in Indonesia.

6. To state any limitation of the study, particularly related to No. 5 above. This is important as there are always new information and development of CoVID-19 between now and back in end of 2019.

Thank you and all the best.

Reviewer #3: 33: This study aims to assess . . . .

36: Socio-demographics

39: Specify the 64.9% and 51.5% positive attitude and practice

98: Measurement tools

101: GL, IA, and AMP write full abbreviation

104 and 106: Socio-demographic

122: Explain what do you mean by two 12 five-point Likert, In table it is 5 Likert scale?

166: What do you mean by older students here? Female and older students. If possible, specify which age group, how do you interpretate older students. Median age is 20 IQR 19-21.

168: Table 1 is representing the “Odd Ratio (OR)” and need to rephrase the interpretation in the text, how it has been interpretated female and older students were more knowledge able

228: correlation value and p value are different from table S5

Specify the cut off score knowledge, Attitude, and Practice score in Table S1

Do mention percentage and frequency n (%) in table S3 and S4

Kindly check the divorced percentage and frequency in Table 2

Concern with your ref value in table 2 and 3. Some independent variables ref is first variable and in some it is last and some in between… be consistent

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2022 Jan 21;17(1):e0262827. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0262827.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


14 Dec 2021

Dear Editor-in-chief and respected reviewers,

Thank you for the comments from the editor and reviewers on our manuscript. We really appreciate the constructive and detailed feedback on our manuscript. We have revised the current submitted manuscript based on the reviewers’ feedback as detailed in the "Response to reviewer (see appendix page 71-75)". The texts highlighted in yellow refer to changes made following the reviewers’ suggestions.

We hope you will kindly reconsider our submission and we are looking forward to the publication of our manuscript.

Thank you very much in advance for your kind consideration.

Sincerely yours,

Representing all authors

Indah Suci Widyahening, MD, M.S., M.Sc-CMFM, PhD

Department of Community Medicine,

Faculty of Medicine Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta 10430, Indonesia

Phone/Fax No: +62 21 3141066

Email Address: indah_widyahening@ui.ac.id

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to reviewer.docx

Decision Letter 1

Muhammad Junaid Farrukh

6 Jan 2022

Knowledge, attitude, and practice related to the COVID-19 pandemic among undergraduate medical students in Indonesia: a nationwide cross-sectional study

PONE-D-21-12734R1

Dear Indah Suci Widyahening

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Muhammad Junaid Farrukh

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

dear author, after reviewing your revised manuscript, we are happy to inform you that your manuscript is now suitable for publication.

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Muhammad Junaid Farrukh

11 Jan 2022

PONE-D-21-12734R1

Knowledge, attitude, and practice related to the COVID-19 pandemic among undergraduate medical students in Indonesia: a nationwide cross-sectional study

Dear Dr. Widyahening:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Muhammad Junaid Farrukh

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table. Characteristics of the study population.

    (DOCX)

    S2 Table. Item-specific responses on the participants’ knowledge on COVID-19.

    (DOCX)

    S3 Table. Item-specific responses on the participants’ attitude towards COVID-19.

    (DOCX)

    S4 Table. Item-specific responses on the participants’ practice towards COVID-19.

    (DOCX)

    S5 Table. Correlation between the students’ level of trust in health information sources with knowledge, attitude, and practice toward COVID-19.

    (DOCX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewer.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES