p. 7−18
2476-6534
Vol.7/No.1
p. 19−52
2476-6534
Vol.7/No.1
p. 53−76
2476-6534
Vol.7/No.1
p. 77−98
2476-6534
Vol.7/No.1
p. 99−120
2476-6534
Vol.7/No.1
p. 121−152
2476-6534
Vol.7/No.1
p. 153−174
2476-6534
Vol.7/No.1
p. 175−198
2476-6534
Vol.7/No.1
0/7) and reliability (Cronbach's alpha>0/7) of the questionnaire were confirmed. Results: the mean COVID-19 knowledge scores of non-medical Librarians and medical librarians are 13.28 and 15.4 respectively. This result shows medical librarians have good knowledge towards COVID-19. The mean COVID-19 attitude scores of non-medical Librarians and medical librarians are 10.52 and 11.72, which indicates that 97.6% of medical librarians have a proper attitude of COVID-19. The mean COVID-19 Practice scores of non-Medical Librarians and medical librarians are 19.33 and 21.66. It shows that 68.5% of medical librarians have a positive practice in preventing COVID-19 and taking preventive measures. Conclusions: there is a significant relationship between the educational group of respondents and their KAP towards COVID-19. Non-Medical Librarians should raise their level of knowledge and awareness as information consultants in the community. The high score of knowledge in medical librarians compared to non-medical librarians means that they are completely aware of Covid 19 disease and are fully aware of its clinical symptoms such as dry cough, fever, fatigue, and muscle aches. This group of librarians knows who the high-risk individuals are for the Covid 19, how the virus can be transmitted more, and there is no effective cure for the disease right now. They have more information about pseudo-scientific information and do not resort to it to manage the disease. The views and attitudes of both groups on the subject of Covid 19 are not the same, and medical librarians have a more realistic and positive attitude than non-medical librarians. The group of medical librarians has a better Practice compared to the group of non-medical librarians in terms of preventive action and observing the issues raised. ]]>
p. 199−224
2476-6534
Vol.7/No.1
p. 225−242
2476-6534
Vol.7/No.1