Creencias erróneas en estudiantes de ciencias de la salud: Un análisis descriptivo de los mitos más comunes
Date
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Rev. Inv. Inf. Sal.
Abstract
Resumen: Introducción: Determinar la prevalencia de las creencias erróneas en estudiante de Ciencias de la salud. Material y métodos: Enfoque cuantitativo; tipo básico, diseño no experimenta y de alcance descriptivo simple. Asimismo, es importante precisar que el instrumento utilizado fue un cuestionario (19 ítems), que mide las cinco dimensiones: vacunas, cáncer, manejo del dolor, salud mental y epilepsia. Resultados: muestran polarización y desinformación en diversos temas de salud. En vacunas, la mayoría rechaza mitos como la relación con el autismo (91,2%, p=0,009), aunque persisten variabilidades (M=8,18, DE=1,96). Sobre el cáncer, predominan incertidumbres respecto a su gravedad y tratamientos (64,7% y 47,1% no seguros), con un conocimiento parcial (M=6,54, DE=1,34, p=0,003). En el manejo del dolor, se observan lagunas sobre su multidimensionalidad (M=6,68; DE=1,47; p<0,001). En salud mental, persisten estigmas (M=5,15; p<0,001); sobre epilepsia, aunque el 97,1% rechaza su contagio, persisten confusiones sobre causas y tratamientos (M=5,15). Discusión: Se puede concluir en la necesidad de intervenciones educativas específicas y accesibles para combatir las creencias erróneas y promover decisiones informadas basadas en evidencia científica.
Abstract: Introduction: To determine the prevalence of misconceptions in Health Sciences students. Materials and methods: Quantitative approach; basic type, non-experimental design and simple descriptive scope. Likewise, it is important to specify that the instrument used was a questionnaire (19 items), which measures the five dimensions: vaccines, cancer, pain management, mental health and epilepsy. Results: They show polarization and misinformation on various health topics. Regarding vaccines, the majority reject myths such as the relationship with autism (91,2%; p = 0,009), although variabilities persist (M = 8,18; SD = 1,96). Regarding cancer, uncertainties predominate regarding its severity and treatments (64.7% and 47,1% unsure), with partial knowledge (M = 6,54; SD = 1,34; p = 0,003). In pain management, gaps are observed regarding its multidimensionality (M=6,68; SD=1,47; p<0.001). In mental health, stigma persists (M=5,15; p<0,001). Regarding epilepsy, although 97,1% reject its contagion, confusion persists regarding causes and treatments (M=5,15). Discussion: It can be concluded that specific and accessible educational interventions are needed to combat erroneous beliefs and promote informed decisions based on scientific evidence.
Abstract: Introduction: To determine the prevalence of misconceptions in Health Sciences students. Materials and methods: Quantitative approach; basic type, non-experimental design and simple descriptive scope. Likewise, it is important to specify that the instrument used was a questionnaire (19 items), which measures the five dimensions: vaccines, cancer, pain management, mental health and epilepsy. Results: They show polarization and misinformation on various health topics. Regarding vaccines, the majority reject myths such as the relationship with autism (91,2%; p = 0,009), although variabilities persist (M = 8,18; SD = 1,96). Regarding cancer, uncertainties predominate regarding its severity and treatments (64.7% and 47,1% unsure), with partial knowledge (M = 6,54; SD = 1,34; p = 0,003). In pain management, gaps are observed regarding its multidimensionality (M=6,68; SD=1,47; p<0.001). In mental health, stigma persists (M=5,15; p<0,001). Regarding epilepsy, although 97,1% reject its contagion, confusion persists regarding causes and treatments (M=5,15). Discussion: It can be concluded that specific and accessible educational interventions are needed to combat erroneous beliefs and promote informed decisions based on scientific evidence.
Description
Vol. 20, No. 48