Results and Discussion

Table 1. Frequency Distribution of the respondents according to their profile.

SEX FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

Male 26 52.0

Female 24 48.0

TOTAL 50 100.0

Sex. Table 1 shows the sample of the respondents consisted of 28 (35.0%) male and 52

(65.0%) female respondents (N=50)

Table 2. Frequency Distribution of the respondents by age.

AGE FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

20 - 29 Yrs. Old 13 26.0

30 - 39 Yrs. Old 10 20.0
40 – 49 Yrs. Old 6 12.0
50 – 59 Yrs. Old 9 18.0
60 Yrs. Old and Above 12 24.0
TOTAL 50 100.0

Age. Table 2 shows the sample of 13 out of 50 respondents (26%) are 20 – 29 years old, 10

(20%) are 30 – 39 years old, 6 among the respondents (26.3%) are 40 – 49 years old, there are 9

out of 80 respondents belong to age group 50 – 59 years old and above and lastly 12 out of 50

(24%) are of age group 60 years old and above. Based from the finding majority of the

respondents is under the age group of 20 – 29 years old.

Table 3. Frequency Distribution of the respondents according to their occupation.

OCCUPATION FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE

Brgy. Chief Officials 4 8.0

Appointive Barangay Officials 13 26.0
Sangguniang Kabatan 7 14.0
Brgy. Health worker 11 22.0
Residents 15 30.0
TOTAL 50 100.0

Educational attainment. Table 3 shows sample of respondents consist of 4 out of 50 are

Brgy. Chief Official (8%) this compose of Brgy. Captain and Brgy. Kagawad; there are also 13

(26%) Appointive Brgy. Officials compose of Brgy. Secretary, Brgy. Treasurer, Brgy. Tanod,

and RIC President; 7(14%) among them are sangguniang kabataan; 11(22%) of the respondents

are Health workers; and majority of the respondents are common residents of the area with a

frequency of 15(30%).

Chart 1. Level of knowledge regarding to IATF guidelines to combat covid-19 as to symptoms.

Note: this figure shows the level of knowledge of the respondents as to symptoms gathered in a

survey. The data show how aware the respondents are on the different symptoms of the COVID-

19 the respondents could state that the three key symptoms of COVID-19 are: Fever 49(98%),

discomfort and difficulty of breathing 47(94%) and Cough 46 (92%). Loss of ability to smell is
the least stated symptoms. The present study's findings revealed a high knowledge of COVID-19,

as depicted by an overall score of 75%.

These findings are in concert with the previous studies conducted in other countries. In the study

conducted in Iran, 80% out of 1480 respondents stated, without prompting, three key

sign/symptoms of Coronavirus: “difficulty breathing” (97.7%), “fever” (97.6%), and “cough”

(94.3%) Kekemam, E., et.al (2020)’Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices among the General

Population During COVID-19 Outbreak in Iran: A national Cross-Sectional Online Survey.’

Frontiers in Public Health, www.frontiersin.org 8(585302) pp. 1-8.

Chart 2. Level of knowledge regarding to IATF guidelines to combat covid19 as to the

transmission of the virus.

Note: this figure shows the level of knowledge regarding to IATF guidelines to combat covid19

as to the transmission of the virus gathered from a survey. The data reveals that 49 out of 50

(98%) of the respondents are aware of the close contact with an infection person who has

symptoms can transmit the virus; 50 (100%) of the respondents are knowledgeable that close

contact with an infected person even if they aren’t showing symptoms of infection is way of

transmission of the virus; there are 43(86%) among the respondents believe that contact with

surfaces an infected person has touch can transmit the virus. As show from the figure, the
respondents have very high knowledge with a mean score of (94.67%) regarding the transmission

of the virus.

Chart 3. Perception of the respondents on World Health Organization (WHO) as trusted source
to provide accurate COVID-19 information.

4 - Very Effective
3 - Effective
2 - Somewhat Effective
1 - Not Effective

Note: The figure shows the perception of the respondents on World Health Organization (WHO)

as trusted source to provide accurate COVID-19 information. Majority of the respondents

23(46%) agreed that WHO is very effective on providing accurate COVID – 19 information;

20(40%) among them stated the WHO is an effective source of information; 7 out of 50 (14%)

stated the WHO is somewhat effective; while none (0%) of them disagreed.

Chart 4. Perception of the respondents on the Official Government Websites as trusted source to
provide accurate COVID-19 information.

4 - Very Effective
3 - Effective
2 - Somewhat Effective
1 - Not Effective
Note: The figure shows the perception of the respondents on the Official Government Websites

as trusted source to provide accurate COVID-19 information. Majority of the respondents

25(50%) agreed that Official Government Websites is effective on providing accurate COVID –

19 information; 23(46%) among them stated the Official Government Websites is very effective

source of information; only 2 out of 50 (4%) stated the WHO is somewhat effective; while none

(0%) of them stated the it is not effective.

Chart 6. Perception of the respondents on doctors and other Health care provider as trusted
source to provide accurate COVID-19 information.

4 - Very Effective
3 - Effective
2 - Somewhat Effective
1 - Not Effective

Note: The figure shows the perception of the respondents on doctors and other Health care

provider as trusted source to provide accurate COVID-19 information. Majority of the

respondents 32(64%) agreed that doctors and other Health care provider is very effective on

providing accurate COVID – 19 information; 15(30%) among them stated the doctors and other

Health care provider is effective source of information; only 3 (6%) stated the doctors and other

Health care provider is somewhat effective; while 0(0%) of them stated the it is not effective.
Chart 7. Perception of the respondents on Newspapers and local News stations as trusted
source to provide accurate COVID-19 information.

4 - Very Effective
3 - Effective
2 - Somewhat Effective
1 - Not Effective

Note: The figure shows the perception of the respondents on Newspapers and local News

stations as trusted source to provide accurate COVID-19 information. 13(26%) agreed that

Newspapers and local News stations is very effective on providing accurate COVID – 19

information; 23(46%) among them stated the Newspapers and local News stations are effective

source of information; there are also 13 (26%) who stated that Newspapers and local News

stations is somewhat effective; while 1(2%) of them stated the it is not effective.

Chart 8. Perception of the respondents on their friends and family members as trusted source to
provide accurate COVID-19 information.

4 - Very Effective
3 - Effective
2 - Somewhat Effective
1 - Not Effective
Note: The figure shows the perception of the respondents on friends and family members as

trusted source to provide accurate COVID-19 information. Only 7(14%) agreed that friends and

family members is very effective on providing accurate COVID – 19 information; 14(28%)

among them stated the friends and family members are effective source of information; while

there are 27 (54%) of the respondents who stated that friends and family members is somewhat

effective; while 2(4%) of them stated the it is not effective as an accurate source of COVID – 19

information.

Chart 9. Perception of the respondents on social media (Facebook, Tweeter, etc.) as trusted
source to provide accurate COVID-19 information.

4 - Very Effective
3 - Effective
2 - Somewhat Effective
1 - Not Effective

Note: The figure shows the perception of the respondents on social media (Facebook, Tweeter,

etc.) as trusted source to provide accurate COVID-19 information. Only 7(14%) agreed that

social media (Facebook, Tweeter, etc.) is very effective on providing accurate COVID – 19

information; 11(22%) among them stated the social media (Facebook, Tweeter, etc.) are effective

source of information; while there are 21 (42%) of the respondents who stated that friends and

family members is somewhat effective; and there are 11(22%) of the respondents stated the it is

not effective as a source of COVID – 19 information.

Table 4. Overall mean response of the respondents on the most trusted source of information
regarding to IATF guidelines to combat covid19.

Std. Descriptive
Mean
Deviation Interpretation
World Health Organization (WHO) 3.32 .713 Very Effective
Official government websites 3.42 .575 Very Effective
Doctors or other health care providers 3.58 .609 Very Effective
Newspaper, Local news station 2.96 .781 Effective
Friends or family members 2.52 .789 Effective
Social Media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) 2.28 .970 Somewhat Effective

3.26 – 4.0 - Very Effective

2.60 – 3.25 - Effective
1.76 – 2.5 - Somewhat Effective
1.00 -1.75 - Not Effective

Overall mean response. Table 4. Shows the overall perception of the respondents on the most

trusted source of information of COVID – 19. The data reveals that world health organization is

very effective (M = 3.32, SD = .713); the different Official government websites is also very

effective (M = 3.42, SD = .575). one of the trusted source of information as stated are the

Doctors or other health care providers (M = 3.58, SD = .575) provides very effective COVD – 19

information; Newspapers, Local news stations (M =2.96, SD = .781), and Friends or family

members (M = 2.52, SD = .789) are effective as stated on the result of the survey; while social

media (Facebook, Twiter, etc.) (M = 2.28, SD = .970) is agreed upon the survey as somewhat

effective. The data reveals that the most trusted source of information in providing accurate

information on COVID – 19 are the doctors and other health care providers.

Health care providers were reported as the most trusted source of information about COVID-19

but were less likely to be a source of information, with less than half of respondents getting

information from their health care provider. One reason may be that people are simply not

interacting with their health care providers on a frequent or occasional basis right now. Providers

may also not have sufficient information at their disposal to be able to dispense up-to-date
guidance to their patients, or if they do, they may not have adequate channels to share

information with their patient population as a whole (Teske, K., 2020).

Table 5. Response of the respondents regarding to IATF guidelines to combat covid19?

Descriptive
Statement Mean SD
Interpretation
1. Spiritual Practice (Praying) 2.48 .505 All the time
2. Wearing a face mask 2.72 .454 All the time
3. Washing your hands with soap and using hand sanitizer 2.92 .274 All the time
4. Seeing a health care provider if you feel sick or if you 2.68 .471 All the time
feel healthy but worry that you were exposed
5. Avoiding public spaces, gatherings, and crowds and 2.68 .471 All the time
avoiding contact with people who could be high-risk.
6. Have you stayed at home as much as possible? 2.58 .499 All the time
7. Have you practiced social distancing? (i.e., reduced your 2.64 .485 All the time
physical contact with people outside of your home in
social, work, or school settings by avoiding large groups
and staying 3-6 feet away from other people when out in
public)
8. How often do you wear your mask going outside your 2.82 .388 All the time
vicinity or public areas?
9. Do you take multivitamins every day? 2.48 .505 All the time
10. Wearing PPE while having close contact? (For Brgy. 2.69 .471 All the time
Officials/Health Workers Only)
11. Disinfecting working areas at least three times a week 2.72 .455 All the time
(For Brgy. Officials/Health Workers Only)
Overall response 2.62 .299 All the time

2.33 – 3.00 - All the time

1.67 – 2.32 - Sometimes
1.00 – 1.66 - Never

Table 5. shows the overall mean response of the respondents regarding to IATF guidelines to

combat covid19, they keep following the actions stated for keeping safe from COVID – 19 all the

time. Spiritual Practice (Praying) (M = 2.48, SD = .505); Wearing a face mask (M = 2.72, SD

= .454); Washing your hands with soap and using hand sanitizer (M = 2.92, SD = .274); Seeing a

health care provider if you feel sick or if you feel healthy but worry that you were exposed (M =
2.68, SD = .471); Avoiding public spaces, gatherings, and crowds and avoiding contact with

people who could be high-risk (M =2.68, SD = .471); staying at home as much as possible (M =

2.58, SD = .499); Practiced social distancing i.e., reduced your physical contact with people

outside of your home in social, work, or school settings by avoiding large groups and staying 3-6

feet away from other people when out in public. (M = 2.64, SD = .485); Wearing your mask

going outside your vicinity or public areas (M = 2.82, SD = .388); Taking multivitamins every

day (M = 2.48, SD = .505); Wearing PPE while having close contact (For Brgy. Officials/Health

Workers Only) (M = 2.69, SD = .471); Disinfecting working areas at least three times a week

(For Brgy. Officials/Health Workers Only) (M = 2.72, SD = .455).

As show from the data gathered, the overall response of the respondents (M = 2.62, SD = .299)

implies a good practice in combating COVID-19.

These findings are in concert with the previous studies conducted in other Asian countries

(Ferdous et al., 2020; Neupane et al., 2020; Sulistyawati et al., 2021; Widayati, 2021; Zhang et

al., 2020; Zhong et al., 2020; Zhou et al., 2020). The early onset of the pandemic, the Philippines'

Department of Health continued the information dissemination campaigns about the importance

of handwashing, covering of nose and mouth while coughing and sneezing, use of sanitizers, use

of face masks, avoiding contact of fingers with mouth, nose, and eyes (Philippine Daily Inquirer,

2020; Republic of the Philippines, 2020). Another public action being implemented is through

social distancing or physical distancing, which is people should practice being at least 6 feet apart

from each other, avoidance of group gathering and crowded places (Centers for Disease Control

and Prevention, 2020a).

Table 6: Significant difference on the Knowledge and Response of the respondents on combating
COVID-19.

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Std. Std. Interval of the
Deviatio Error Difference Sig. (2-
Mean n Mean Lower Upper t df tailed)
Knowledge -
.146 .272 .039 0.068 .223 3.785 49 .000
Response

To test the hypothesis that the knowledge of the respondents in combating COVID-19 (M =

2.76, SD = 0.292) and the response on combating COVID-19 means (M = 2.62, SD = 0.299), a

paired sample T-test was performed. The t(49) = 3.785, p < 0.05 (two-tailed) (M = .146, SD

= .272) with a 95% confidence interval ranging from 0.068 to 0.223. It is also noted that the

correlation between the two conditions was estimated at r = .576, p < 0.05, suggesting that the

null hypothesis was rejected in favor to the research hypothesis which means that there is no

significant difference on the knowledge and response of the respondents in combating the

COVID-19.

Table 7: Significant relationship on the Knowledge and Response of the respondents on

combating COVID-19.

Knowledge Response
Knowledge Pearson Correlation (r) .576**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Response Pearson Correlation .576**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

To explore the relationship between the knowledge and response of the respondents, a Pearson r

correlation coefficient was calculated between these two variables. The results indicated the
knowledge mean score (M = 2.76, SD = 0.292) of the respondents increases as the response ((M

= 2.62, SD = 0.299) increases. The result analysis found a moderate positive correlation (r(42) =

.576, p < 0.05), implies that there is statistically significant correlation between the knowledge

and the response of the respondents in combating COVID – 19. The researcher hypothesis was

disconfirmed, it means that the higher the knowledge about COVID – 19 the higher the response

on combating the virus.

The significant relationship between knowledge and response was highlighted in this study. This

means that having high knowledge about the clinical presentations, transmission routes, and

prevention and control, the higher the chance that the general population may continue to

advocate on various mechanisms in contracting the virus. Also, the more positive attitudes that

the general population has, the more they would advocate preventive measures. (Ferdous et al.,

2020; Neupane et al., 2020; Sulistyawati et al., 2021; Widayati, 2021; Zhang et al., 2020; Zhong

et al., 2020; Zhou et al., 2020).