Knowledge and awareness of stroke in the United Arab Emirates: a cross-sectional study of the general population

Background: The study aimed to assess stroke knowledge among the general population in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and determine the factors associated with stroke awareness among people. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in the UAE between September and November 2021. The general population has self-administered an online bilingual survey (Arabic and English) distributed via social media platforms. The questionnaire covered general knowledge about stroke risk factors, consequences of stroke, and responding to somebody with acute stroke attack. Results: A total of 545 surveys were completed, with more than half of the participants being female (58.5%), married (55.4%) and employed (59.4%). The majority were less than 50 years old (90.5%) and had a university degree (71.0%). Many of the participants (70.8%) had a good general knowledge of stroke; however, around 20% of the participants were able to recognize all symptoms and risk factors of stroke. The most common sources of stroke-related information were the internet/social media (53.6%). Females were better able to correctly identify at least one stroke symptom and outcome than males (p=0.008). University education has significantly affected participants’ ability to identify early stroke symptoms (p=0.001) correctly. In addition, diabetic people were more likely to recognize at least one stroke outcome than non-diabetic people (p=0.039). Conclusions: The knowledge of stroke was good among highly educated people and females. However, the awareness of all stroke risk factors, symptoms, consequences and risk factors was inadequate among the general population of the UAE. Thus, there is still a gap between recognition of the relevant stroke and taking action among people.


Introduction
Stroke is a major cause of mortality, morbidity and a leading cause of disability worldwide.The incidence of stroke increases in parallel to age, the prevalence of chronic cardiovascular disease and unhealthy lifestyle. 1,2Stroke is a health condition that describes a disruption of the blood supply to the brain and thus has devastating health consequences resulting from oxygen starvation and brain cellular damage. 3This damage might lead to paralysis, speech and communication problems, cognitive and memory problems, and death. 4cording to World Stroke Organization, stroke has already become a worldwide epidemic and the prevalence rate of stroke reaching around 13.7 million people by the year 2021, and approximately 40% of them are going to die because of the stroke.The data also urged for action as the statistics indicate a rise to 6.7 million expected annual deaths if no actions were taken. 5,6evention is a key to reducing the burden of stroke, with joint efforts required at the individual and community levels.People's knowledge and stroke awareness are essential for primary stroke prevention and timely access to stroke treatments, including acute reperfusion therapies (such as thrombolysis and mechanical thrombectomy).][9][10] Generally, knowledge of risk factors and warning signs in the general population is consistently inadequate or poor. 11,12e UAE is a fast growing developing country where the last country report on the population number reaching nearly ten million. 13In addition, the UAE is a youth country where 65% of the people are between (25-54 years old). 14There has been about a 40-times increased in country's population in the past four decades, plus the disparity in education, beliefs, and cultural practices has posed many challenges for shaping population-based public health strategies. 15,168][19] However, stroke is considered among the top killer diseases in the country.It is located just behind the ischemic heart diseases and road injuries, where the number of deaths between 1990-2019 has changed by 105%. 20though there were several calls from national media and practitioners regarding the importance of enhancing awareness among residents in the UAE regarding stroke, only a few available published data have been assessed the awareness level and knowledge among residents in the UAE. 20In a recent study carried out by a group of researchers in one city (the emirate of Sharjah) to assess the knowledge of the stroke among adult residents, data revealed that around 25% of people were misdescribed the disease. 21Another study that evaluated the knowledge of stroke in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) confirmed a poor level of knowledge among GCC communities and urged stroke educational campaigns. 22ere are multifactorial aspects of importance in this study.The high prevalence of the disease, the level of stroke knowledge of the public in the country, the level of ignorance of symptoms among the people, and the scarcity of data available for healthcare professionals and health strategists that may help develop programs to increase stroke awareness among the population including rapid response when faced with a case of stroke, which may also help focus on people with poor knowledge of stroke.The current study aimed to assess stroke knowledge among the general population in the UAE and determine the factors associated with stroke awareness.

Ethical approval
The study received ethical approval from the research ethics committee (REC-21-03-20-01) at the University of Sharjah, UAE.All participants agreed to participate in the study by selecting "I agree" on the electronic informed consent form before filling out the questionnaire.All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations or declaration of Helsinki.

REVISED Amendments from Version 1
There is no major differences between this version of the article and the previously published version; however, some points were clarified and corrected based on the valuable comments and suggestions of the reviewers.
Any further responses from the reviewers can be found at the end of the article

Study design and questionnaire
The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) reporting guideline for crosssectional studies was adopted and followed as a protocol for conducting this study. 23A cross-sectional observational study was conducted in the UAE between September and November 2021 using an anonymous online survey from the general population.The questionnaire was structured similarly to a survey developed and validated in a published study among the general population in Jordan in all aspects that covered knowledge of the stroke with the exception of sociodemographic factors such as economic status due to the discrepancy between the two countries. 9The mentioned survey has been developed using the general principles of good survey design. 24An online survey 25 was created on Google Forms and distributed via social media applications (WhatsApp and Facebook); through sent it to public general groups in WhatsApp and posted the survey several times in many public pages in Facebook, after obtaining approval from the administrators of these pages.Participation in this study was voluntary, and participants over 18 years old were eligible.Those with a history of stroke were excluded, through used a question to ask whether the participant had ever had a stroke, and if the participant answered yes, the survey was terminated.The survey was self-administered and took approximately ten minutes to complete.The survey was bilingual: Arabic and English.As the Arabic language is the native language of the Emirati citizens and also of the Arabs living in the UAE.The English language survey was conducted for non-Arabic speakers who consist a large ratio of the population in the UAE.A bilingual committee composed of three pharmacy academics translated the English version of the questionnaire into Arabic.An Englishspeaking translator subsequently performed a back translation and any discrepancies were resolved with the help of the original board.Eight people (authors) and two academic members reviewed the questionnaire and then underwent a fiveperson pilot test to ensure the clarity of the questions.Then, the questions were modified based on their feedback.
The first section of the questionnaire covered the socio-demographic data.The second section assessed the overall knowledge about stroke and evaluated awareness about stroke risk factors, consequences of stroke, and response when facing somebody with a stroke attack.Moreover, it examined knowledge of early warning signs: participants were awarded one point per correct answer to the above statements.The third section identified sources of information related to stroke among the participants.In addition, there was a question that asked about people's interest in receiving more information related to stroke, including symptoms, emergency signs and responses when facing someone with a stroke attack and the consequences of the stroke.

Sample size calculation
The target sample size was estimated to be 384 participants.The number was based on the Raosoft ® software sample size calculator, 26 for the minimal sample size needed for an unlimited population size using a confidence interval of 95%, a standard deviation of 0.5 and a margin error of 5%.

Statistical analysis
The data collected 27 were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25.0.Continuous variables were presented as mean AE standard deviation (SD) and 95% confidence interval (CI).Categorical and ordinal variables were presented as frequencies and percentages.Binary logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with the ability to automatically answer one or more stroke risk factors, one or more warning signs, one or more consequences, and to seek an emergency room once a stroke had developed.Variables with p < 0.2 in the bivariate analysis were included in the regression analysis.The results were presented as odds ratios (OR) and 95% CI.Statistical tests were two-tailed and had a statistical significance of p < 0.05.
The choice of a p-value cutoff of 0.2 in bivariate analysis is due to the need to identify potential associations between variables that may warrant further investigation.This will help screen a larger set of potential predictor variables to see whether they have any initial association with the outcome variable and variables that meet this threshold can then be considered for further analysis in a multivariate context.

Demographic data
A total of 593 surveys were collected from the general population; 48 surveys were excluded because of incomplete responses or refusal to participate.As a result, 545 participants were included in the final study analysis.
More than half of the respondents were females (58.5%), married (55.4%) and employed (59.4%).The majority were less than 50 years (90.5%),non-UAE citizens (73.0%) and held a university bachelor's degree or above (71.0%).Regarding their medical status, hypertension (12.1%) and dyslipidemia (11.7%) were the most reported comorbid conditions.Moreover, more than half of the respondents (58.3%) stated being only slightly aware of stroke, and one-third (33.8%) knew about stroke from family members or relatives who had this disease before.The demographic characteristics of the respondents are presented in Table 1.

Stroke knowledge of the participants
Many respondents (70.8%) recognized the brain as the primary organ affected by a stroke.In comparison, less than half (42.9%) perceived it as a preventable disease (Figure 1A).As for early stroke symptoms, only 21.3% of participants were able to recognize all symptoms of a stroke.The most often recognized symptoms were sudden difficulty speaking/ understanding speech (78.0%), loss of consciousness/fainting (73.8%) and sudden dizziness (71.4%) (Figure 1B).When asked about possible risk factors, only 22.2% of participants were able to identify all stroke risk factors.The most three frequently identified risk factors were high blood pressure (90.3%), stress (79.3%) and old age (68.1%) (Figure 1C).Most  Figure 2. Participants' Sources of information about stroke.participants (77.4%) and (75.6%) reported that stroke might lead to functional/movement problem and cognitive/memory problems, respectively.In addition, many participants (70.2%) reported that stroke might lead to long-term disability (Figure 1D).
Only 21.1% of the respondents believed they do not have good knowledge about stroke and its effects.However, the majority of the participants (82.7%) were curious to have more information related to stroke, including symptoms, emergency signs and responses when facing someone with a stroke attack and the consequences of the stroke.In addition, the majority of participants (94.9%) believed that the role of the family is essential in providing care to a patient with stroke at an early stage.In addition, more than half of the participants (54.7%) believed that stroke disease could make patients' lives unhappy.
The most common sources of stroke-related information reported by participants were internet/social media (53.6%), followed by healthcare professionals (38.5%) and family/relatives (31.4%) (Figure 2).

Bivariate analysis
In the bivariate analysis, females were better able to significantly identify at least one correct stroke symptom than males (92.8% vs. 85.8%,p = 0.008).Moreover, participants with higher levels of education (university level) correctly identified early stroke symptoms compared to those with lower educational levels (92.8% vs. 82.9%,p = 0.001), as demonstrated in Table 2.
Regarding stroke consequences, females compared to males (89% vs. 82.3%,p = 0.025) and those with diabetes compared with having no history of diabetes were more likely to recognize at least one consequence of stroke (97.4% vs. 85.4%, p = 0.039).Compared to UAE citizens, non-UAE citizen showed significantly higher recognition of stroke consequences (88.7% vs. 79.6%,p = 0.006) (Table 2).
For the response to acute stroke symptoms, none of the studied characteristics were significantly associated with the correct action which is taking patients to the hospital responded to acute stroke symptoms.

Multivariable logistic regression
When considering the identification of at least an early stroke symptom as the dependent variable, the multivariable analysis showed that females versus males and university compared to school level of education had significantly higher odds (OR of 1.9 and 2.5, respectively).In addition, those with low and medium incomes versus meager incomes were significantly associated with early symptoms identification (OR of 2.5 and 3.1, respectively) (Table 3).
When considering the identification of at least one consequence of stroke as the dependent variable, females versus males and those with non-UAE citizens versus UAE citizens had significantly higher odds (OR of 1.9 and 2.1, respectively) (Table 3).Regarding the correct response to acute stroke symptoms as the dependent variable, smokers versus nonsmokers were more likely to respond by taking the patient to the hospital (OR of 1.5).

Discussion
A study to assess stroke knowledge among the general UAE population was conducted.More than half of the participants were female and employed.The majority were less than 50 years old and had a university bachelor's degree or higher.Good general knowledge of stroke was reported in more than two-thirds of the participants.However, just over 20% of the participants recognized all of the symptoms of stroke and were able to identify all of the stroke risk factors.
In 2019, a study by Karkout et al. reported an average to low level of knowledge about stroke among the adult population in the UAE. 21Although the majority of our study participants could identify the brain as a typical stroke-affected organ, they were unable to recognize all symptoms and risk factors associated with stroke.However, they identified at least four symptoms, five risk factors, and three-stroke consequences.Visual issues and severe headaches were the least detected signs and symptoms of stroke in the Karkout et al. study. 21At the same time, African American race, female gender, and advanced age were the least identified risk factors for stroke. 21[30][31] In our study, 99.8% of participants identified at least one risk factor related to stroke.In comparison, previous studies have reported 98.1% among 573 participants in Jordan, 9 85.4% among 5391 participants in first study in Lebanon, 10 and 97.8% among 551 participants in the second study in Lebanon, 32 76.2% among 822 participants in Australia, 28 76.2% among 609 participants in Iraq, 33 59.6% among 2,884 participants in Spain, 34 and 8.6% among 4,671 participants in Benin of West Africa. 35Conversely, other previous studies have demonstrated poor knowledge of stroke risk factors and symptoms in the general population. 7,36,37High blood pressure, hyperglycemia, obesity, renal dysfunction, and hyperlipidemia are all risk factors for stroke, according to the American Heart Association's latest update for 2021, with a further (47%) attributed to behavioral risk factors like sedentary behavior, smoking, and an unhealthy diet. 38With percentages reaching 50%, hypertension, psychological stress, old age, hypercholesterolemia, smoking, heart disease, physical inactivity, and obesity were the most recognized risk factors for stroke in our study.Unlike a previous Sharjah study in 2019, which found that hypertension (87.0%), hypercholesterolemia (72.6%), obesity (62.3%), and hyperglycemia (59.2%) were the most commonly identified risk factors in the study. 21This demonstrates a more confident tendency among our study participants to recognize stroke risk factors.Furthermore, participants in several studies conducted in Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Iraq, and Morocco reported that hypertension and stress were main risk factors for stroke, at different levels. 9,10,32,33,39,40Diabetes Mellitus was somewhat less recognized by our study participants, despite being one of the most frequent modifiable risk factors for stroke (49.7%).This finding has been observed in other investigations in Jordan, Iraq and Morocco. 9,33,40th regard to stroke symptoms, participants in our study expressed a high percentage recalling at least one stroke symptom (89.9%) compared to studies in Jordan (95.5%), 9 Iraq (76.2%), 33 Portugal (74.2%), 41 Norway (70.7%), 42 Canada (69.5%), 43 Oman (68.0%), 44 Korea (65%), 45 Lebanon (68.2%), 10 and Benin of west Africa (4.9%). 35In contrast to our study, only (23%) of participants in a prior 2007 study among GCC countries, including the UAE, identified at least one sign or symptom connected to stroke, which is still a low percentage. 22Sudden difficulty speaking or understanding speech was the most frequently reported stroke symptom in our study (78.0%) with same symptom reported in previous studies in Jordan (92.3%), 9 Iraq (88.0%), 33 China (65.2%), 46 Saudi Arabia (63.8%), 39 Ireland (54%), 11 and Australia (14.2%). 28However, in Omani (65%) and Nigerian (24.4%) populations, sudden weakness on one side of the body was the most prevalent stroke symptom were reported. 44,47 terms of their attitudes toward stroke, less than half of the participants in our study (23.9%) were encouraged to go to a hospital as soon as possible after a stroke was detected, with no strong correlation to their socio-demographic characteristics.In a recent large study in China involving 3,051 adults, this phenomenon of paradoxical behavior toward seeking immediate medical help was recognized, with around (25%) of participants who recognized at least one of the stroke symptoms in the stroke action scenario not indicating that they would call an ambulance. 46Nevertheless, previous studies emphasized the need for immediate medical care for stroke patients. 35,43,48,49In Oman, 73% of participants reported they would immediately go to the hospital emergency if they suspected a stroke. 44However, percentages from international studies may vary, with only 47% claiming they would go to a hospital if they were suspicious of a stroke. 50n a previous study in Jordan using the same evaluation measure, participants who were well educated, employed, or diagnosed with diabetes expressed a readiness to take a patient to the hospital as soon as possible if they suspected a stroke. 9Such discrepancies necessitate a more in-depth examination to address knowledge gaps in our study population.
It is self-evident that a greater understanding of the implications of a stroke would necessitate timely treatment.
Until 2008, a systematic analysis linked the female gender to a superior overall understanding of stroke risk factors and symptoms. 36In our study, adequate knowledge about risk factors was not attributed significantly to any sociodemographic characteristics, but learning about stroke symptoms was attributed significantly to female gender and advanced education while learning about consequences of stroke was attributed significantly to female gender and nationality of participants.In another study, the male gender was found to be a predictor of increased knowledge. 47revious research has found no consistent gender correlations in favor of such differences in knowledge of stroke's risk factors, symptoms, or consequences, so whether there are gender-specific variations in knowledge remains debatable and would require further in-depth causality analyses. 49,51,52On the other hand, women are more knowledgeable, show a greater interest in health issues, and spend more time looking for information than men. 53 terms of stroke information resources, the internet and social media were regarded as the most relied on among participants, followed by healthcare professionals and family and/or relatives.However, in studies in Jordan and Iraq, the sequence of the sources of information are similar but the percentages of participants are different. 9,34This is concerning since publicly available health information on social media may not be evidence-based and is frequently misunderstood by the general public. 40,54,55nally, although the levels of awareness and knowledge related to stroke and risk factors among the people of the UAE were high compared with many studies among people in the region and the world, these levels were still not sufficient.7][58][59] Therefore, organizational health literacy is needed to target individuals with inadequate personal health knowledge related to stroke among the UAE population through systematic, credible, evidence-based, and accessible health awareness tools.Further research on a national scale could confirm more representative findings of the UAE population.

Limitations
There are some drawbacks to this study that can be identified.First, the study tool (online survey) requires technical requirements (access to internet and mobile/computer), and reading ability, hence the representation of the population may be compromised.Second, information bias connected to on-demand resource accessibility can jeopardize answer credibility.Third, selection bias associated with the snowball collection technique could be an issue, as there is no guarantee for random selection.Unmeasured variables or responses to variables directly or indirectly connected to stroke could cause residual confounding bias.Furthermore, using an online survey rather than a face-to-face meeting puts the study data's trustworthiness and authenticity in danger.The online poll includes questions relevant to the UAE and a detailed description of the target population and inclusion criteria in the title and invitation message.Given the COVID-19 pandemic's restriction measures, such a methodology was the best alternative.

Conclusions
Although the general UAE population has a moderate to high level of personal health literacy when it comes to stroke risk factors, symptoms, and consequences, recognition of all stroke symptoms, risk factors, and consequences were low, and there is still a gap between recognizing a stroke-related event and taking immediate action.Better knowledge of many stroke elements was associated with higher education levels and the female gender.
Additional studies at the national level could confirm results that are more representative of the general UAE population.More work is needed to raise awareness among people in the UAE through a structured, reliable, evidence-based and accessible health awareness program to target all people in the UAE especially individuals who do not have sufficient knowledge regarding stroke.

Underlying data
Open Science Framework: Underlying data for 'Knowledge and awareness of stroke in the United Arab Emirates: A cross-sectional study of the general population', https://www.doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/DV6FS. 27his project contains the following underlying data: -Raw Data.xlsx 27

Extended data
Open Science Framework: Extended data for 'Knowledge and awareness of stroke in the United Arab Emirates: A crosssectional study of the general population', https://www.doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/DV6FS. 25is project contains the following extended data: -Stroke Awareness Questionnaire -UAE.docx 25

Reporting guidelines
Open Science Framework: STROBE checklist for 'Knowledge and awareness of stroke in the United Arab Emirates: A cross-sectional study of the general population', https://www.doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/DV6FS. 23ta are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0).

Doaa Alkhalidi
Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacotherapeutics, Dubai Pharmacy College for Girls, Dubai, United Arab Emirates The study is interesting.

○
The title is appropriate.

○
The written text needs to be revised to ensure that grammatically correct (some mistakes are there).

○
The objectives are clearly stated.

○
In the abstract (results), it has been mentioned that Many of the participants (70.8%) had a good general knowledge of stroke; however, around 20% of the participants were able to recognize all symptoms and risk factors of stroke.How good level of knowledge has been decided.This has to be explained under the methods section, through the scoring system applied in the data analysis.In addition, it needs to be reflected in the results section.

○
It has been mentioned in the "Study Design and Questionnaire" section that those with a history of stroke were excluded.The authors need to clarify how the exclusion took place since it is an online survey.

○
The authors need to explain the validation process of the developed questionnaire.

○
How was the reliability of the questionnaire ensured?

○
In the same section, the scoring system applied needs further elaboration.What about the incorrect answers?

○
In Table 1, the last variable was about Familiarity with a history of stroke: in the family Personally know someone with stroke, what is the difference between each of them?○ In the Results section, " Stroke knowledge of the participants" it has been found that (majority of the participants (82.7%) were curious to have more information related to stroke, including symptoms, emergency signs and responses when facing someone with a stroke attack and the consequences of the stroke), how participants curiosity has been measured through the survey?

○
The conclusion is not clearly expressed.It has been mentioned "general UAE population has a high level of personal health literacy" But "stroke risk factors, symptoms, and consequences, recognition of all stroke symptoms, risk factors, and consequences were low" as a reader, it is recognized as a contradiction.The conclusion needs to be expressed more clearly, and some recommendations need to be suggested by the authors based on their findings.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?Yes

Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?I cannot comment.A qualified statistician is required.

Best regards
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.Several sentences are required to be rephrased to be clear to the readers, especially in the abstract. 1.
In methodology, please write about the questionnaire's validity procedure and reliability outcomes.

2.
In the statistical analysis (Methodology ): What do you mean by "Variables with p < 0.2 in the bivariate analysis"?Why did you select the cutoff equal to 0.2?Please justify and support the sentence with a reference.

3.
Figure 1 is blurred.Please try to find a clear image.4.
Please be consistent with the background of Table 2.

5.
Table 3, please add columns of the df and confidence interval.The readers like to see the validity of outcomes.

6.
In Table 3, please correct the level of high income (High (>2K)).Also, justify why the income increase of the early symptoms identified is not significant.

7.
In the Discussion, please be consistent in writing the following sentence: "In comparison, previous studies have reported 98.1% among 573 participants in Jordan, 85.4% (n = 5391) to 97.8% (n = 551) in Lebanon, 76.2% among 822 participants in Australia, 76.2% among 609 participants in Iraq, 8.6% among 4,671 in Benin of West Africa".

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?Yes Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?Yes If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?Yes Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?Yes

Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Yes
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Reviewer Expertise: Clinical Pharmacy, Public Health, Pharmacogenetics, and Biostatistics I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.
The author has mentioned that the google forms of the questionnaire was distributed through WhatsApp and Facebook.Will there be a possibility of bias if the study participants discuss or share the questions with their friends for right answers.What measures have been taken by the author to avoid this bias?

2.
The sample size of the study was estimated to be 384 participants, however we could see that 545 participants were included in the study.Need justification for selecting more number of participants in the study or else the author need to recalculate the sample size.

If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?Yes

Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Yes
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Knowledge of the participants (n = 545) about [A] Stroke, [B] Risk factors related to stroke, [C] Early symptoms of stroke, and [D] Consequences of stroke.

Reviewer Report 28
September 2023 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.147377.r204544© 2023 Al-Ani H.This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.Hadeer Akram Abdulrazzaq Al-Ani Department of Public Health, School of Medicine, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, USA I want to congratulate the authors of this study for their excellent work and achievement in implementing and publishing the present study.I have several points that are required to be edited and corrected.
AED, Emirati Dirham (the official currency of the UAE).*Missing values for employment status (n = 5).

Table 2 .
Association of risk factors, early symptoms and consequences of stroke with the socio-demographic characteristics and past medical history (n = 545).

Table 2 .
Continued Numbers in bold indicate significant p-values (p < 0.05).*For the variable income level, n = 99 preferred not to answer this question.

Table 3 .
Multivariate analysis of associations between socio-demographic data of the participants (n = 545) and identification of risk factors, early symptoms, consequences of stroke and taking a patient to a hospital.
β, Beta; SE, standard error; OR. adjusted ratio; CI, confidence interval.Logistic regression took stroke early symptoms, stroke consequences, and taking a patient who is experiencing a stroke to the hospital as the dependent variables and socio-demographic factors (gender, residence area, educational level, employment status, and smoking history) as independent variables.Numbers in bold indicate significant p-values (p < 0.05).*Reference.