rss
J Epidemiol Community Health 2006;60:745-750 doi:10.1136/jech.2005.041731
  • Evidence based public health policy and practice

Perceived causes of sporadic cryptosporidiosis and their relation to sources of information

  1. Miguel F Doria1,
  2. Ibrahim Abubakar2,
  3. Qutub Syed3,
  4. Sara Hughes3,
  5. Paul R Hunter2
  1. 1Centre for Environmental Risk, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
  2. 2School of Medicine, Health Policy and Practice, University of East Anglia
  3. 3Health Protection Agency Northwest, Liverpool, UK
  1. Correspondence to:
 Professor P R Hunter
 School of Medicine, Health Policy and Practice, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ; UK; Paul.Hunter{at}uea.ac.uk
  • Accepted 28 February 2006

Abstract

Background: The importance of a person’s perceptions about the causes of their disease has been emphasised by research on various diseases. Several studies have found perception may be linked to protective behaviours.

Objective: This study intends to identify the main perceived causes of sporadic cryptosporidiosis, and to analyse some of the factors that may influence respondent’s perception. The role of respondents’ attributions, the scientific plausibility of perceptions, and the importance of specific information sources are also explored.

Design: Quantitative and qualitative analyses of data from a case-control study.

Setting: General population in Wales and north west England.

Participants: The study is based on a sample of 411 respondents from Wales and north west of England, whose cryptosporidiosis diagnosis was confirmed by a laboratory.

Results: The results show that the most frequent perceived causes are water (by drinking it or swimming), contagion (mostly from children), and contaminated food. Perceived causes are qualitatively similar to the ones described in scientific literature, but some quantitative differences are evident. Respondents’ certainty in relation to the cause of illness is directly related with plausibility. The most frequent information sources used by respondents were test stool results, environmental health officers, and doctors or nurses. Results suggest that information sources may influence the perception of the causes of cryptosporidiosis. Qualitative data provided a few clues about situations where sporadic and outbreak cases may be confused.

Conclusion: In contrast with outbreaks, various information sources in addition to the media are used by people with sporadic cryptosporidiosis that in turn affects the perception of aetiology. This has implications for the dissemination of information about control measures for cryptosporidiosis and surveillance activities.

Footnotes

  • Funding: UK Drinking Water Inspectorate, United Utilities and North West Health Region provided funding for the study. MFD is grateful to Gulbenkian Foundation for their support.

  • Conflicts of interest: none.

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.

Latest infectious diseases and epidemilogy jobs

Ophthalmology Jobs