Factors Related to Health Risk Communication Outcomes among Migrant Workers in Thailand during COVID-19: A Case Study of Three Provinces
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design and Setting
2.2. Sample Size and Sampling Method
2.3. Data Collection
2.4. Questionnaire Design
2.5. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Descriptive Analysis
3.2. Inferential Analysis
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Huang, C.; Wang, Y.; Li, X.; Ren, L.; Zhao, J.; Hu, Y.; Zhang, L.; Fan, G.; Xu, J.; Gu, X.; et al. Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. Lancet 2020, 395, 497–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jee, Y. WHO International Health Regulations Emergency Committee for the COVID-19 outbreak. Epidemiol. Health 2020, 42, e2020013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- World Health Organization. Listings of WHO’s Response to COVID-19. Available online: https://www.who.int/news/item/29-06-2020-covidtimeline (accessed on 15 February 2021).
- World Health Organization. Statement on the Second Meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) Emergency Committee Regarding the Outbreak of Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV). Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/30-01-2020-statement-on-the-second-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-outbreak-of-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov) (accessed on 19 May 2021).
- World Health Organization. WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard. Available online: https://covid19.who.int/ (accessed on 21 October 2021).
- Doung-Ngern, P.; Suphanchaimat, R.; Panjangampatthana, A.; Janekrongtham, C.; Ruampoom, D.; Daochaeng, N.; Eungkanit, N.; Pisitpayat, N.; Srisong, N.; Yasopa, O.; et al. Case-Control Study of Use of Personal Protective Measures and Risk for SARS-CoV 2 Infection, Thailand. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2020, 26, 2607–2616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Namwat, C.; Suphanchaimat, R.; Nittayasoot, N.; Iamsirithaworn, S. Thailand’s Response against Coronavirus Disease 2019: Challenges and Lessons Learned. OSIR 2020, 13, 33–37. [Google Scholar]
- World Health Organization. Risk Communication. Available online: https://www.who.int/risk-communication/PIP_brochure_EN_lo.pdf (accessed on 30 May 2021).
- Ministry of Public Health. COVID-19 Infodemic Management: Thailand Experience. The 75th Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, 23 September 2020; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2020. Available online: https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/risk-comms-updates/thailand-unga-presentation-infodemic-thailand-21sep2020-final.pdf?sfvrsn=d757509e_6 (accessed on 30 May 2021).
- Tabari, P.; Amini, M.; Moghadami, M.; Moosavi, M. International Public Health Responses to COVID-19 Outbreak: A Rapid Review. Iran. J. Med. Sci. 2020, 45, 157–169. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Marome, W.; Shaw, R. COVID-19 Response in Thailand and Its Implications on Future Preparedness. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- WHO Thailand Country Office Coronavirus Disease 2019: Situation Report. Available online: https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/searo/thailand/2021_1_25_eng_sitrep_135-covid19.pdf?sfvrsn=a034c3d5_3 (accessed on 15 February 2021).
- Luksamijarulkul, P.; Suknongbung, S.; Vatanasomboon, P.; Sujirarut, D. Health status, environmental living conditions and microbial indoor air quality among migrant worker households in Thailand. Southeast Asian J. Trop. Med. Public Health 2017, 48, 396–406. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- United Nations. Thematic Working Group on Migration in Thailand. Thailand Migration Report 2019; Bangkok, Thailand, 2019. Available online: https://thailand.iom.int/sites/thailand/files/document/publications/Thailand%20Report%202019_22012019_HiRes.pdf (access on 14 April 2021).
- Office of Foreign Workers Administration. Statistics of Remaining Cross-Border Migrants Holding Work Permit in Thailand as of September 2021; Department of Employment, Ministry of Labor: Bangkok, Thailand, 2021. Available online: https://www.doe.go.th/prd/assets/upload/files/alien_th/e7ecaa17a00907e4eefe2a5a81462935.pdf (accessed on 21 October 2021).
- Koh, D. Migrant workers and COVID-19. Occup. Environ. Med. 2020, 77, 634–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- World Health Organization. Interim Guidance for Refugee and Migrant Health in Relation to COVID-19 in the WHO European Region. Available online: https://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/434978/Interim-guidance-refugee-and-migrant-health-COVID-19.pdf (accessed on 17 June 2021).
- Hickey, J.; Gagnon, A.J.; Jitthai, N. Pandemic preparedness: Perceptions of vulnerable migrants in Thailand towards WHO-recommended non-pharmaceutical interventions: A cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health 2014, 14, 665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hickey, J.E.; Gagnon, A.J.; Jitthai, N. Knowledge about pandemic influenza preparedness among vulnerable migrants in Thailand. Health Promot. Int. 2016, 31, 124–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- International Organization for Migration, Thailand. Rapid Assessment: COVID-19-Related Vulnerabilities and Perceptions of Non-Thai Populations in Thailand; Bangkok, April 2020. Available online: https://thailand.iom.int/rapid-assessment-covid-19-related-vulnerabilities-and-perceptions-non-thai-population-thailand (accessed on 10 April 2021).
- International Organization for Migration, Thailand. Rapid Assessment: COVID-19 Related Vulnerabilities and Perceptions of Non-Thai Populations in Thailand (round 2); Bangkok, June 2020. Available online: https://reliefweb.int/report/thailand/rapid-assessment-round-2-covid-19-related-vulnerabilities-and-perceptions-non-thai (accessed on 16 April 2021).
- International Organization for Migration, Thailand. Rapid Assessment: COVID-19 Related Vulnerabilities and Perceptions of Non-Thai Populations in Thailand (round 3); Bangkok, November 2020. Available online: https://thailand.iom.int/rapid-assessment-round-3-covid-19-related-vulnerabilities-and-perceptions-non-thai-populations (accessed on 16 April 2021).
- Jones, C.L.; Jensen, J.D.; Scherr, C.L.; Brown, N.R.; Christy, K.; Weaver, J. The Health Belief Model as an explanatory framework in communication research: Exploring parallel, serial, and moderated mediation. Health Commun. 2015, 30, 566–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Bauza, V.; Sclar, G.D.; Bisoyi, A.; Owens, A.; Ghugey, A.; Clasen, T. Experience of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Rural Odisha, India: Knowledge, Preventative Actions, and Impacts on Daily Life. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 2863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Department of Disease Control. Corona Virus Disease (COVID-19). Available online: https://ddc.moph.go.th/viralpneumonia/eng/index.php (accessed on 1 March 2021).
- Thai Government. Centre for COVID-19 Situation Administration. Available online: https://www.moicovid.com/ (accessed on 1 March 2021).
- Osborne, R.H.; Batterham, R.W.; Elsworth, G.R.; Hawkins, M.; Buchbinder, R. The grounded psychometric development and initial validation of the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ). BMC Public Health 2013, 13, 658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Ministry of Labor. Minimum Wage. Available online: https://www.mol.go.th/en/minimum-wage (accessed on 1 April 2021).
- Simpson, R.M.; Knowles, E.; O’Cathain, A. Health literacy levels of British adults: A cross-sectional survey using two domains of the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ). BMC Public Health 2020, 20, 1819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Didarloo, A.; Nabilou, B.; Khalkhali, H.R. Psychosocial predictors of breast self-examination behavior among female students: An application of the health belief model using logistic regression. BMC Public Health 2017, 17, 861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Doamekpor, L.A.; Dinwiddie, G.Y. Allostatic load in foreign-born and US-born blacks: Evidence from the 2001–2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Am. J. Public Health 2015, 105, 591–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McEwen, B.S. Protection and damage from acute and chronic stress: Allostasis and allostatic overload and relevance to the pathophysiology of psychiatric disorders. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2004, 1032, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Heydari, S.T.; Zarei, L.; Sadati, A.K.; Moradi, N.; Akbari, M.; Mehralian, G.; Lankarani, K.B. The effect of risk communication on preventive and protective Behaviours during the COVID-19 outbreak: Mediating role of risk perception. BMC Public Health 2021, 21, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lee, C.H.; Yun, J.M.; Han, J.S.; Park, S.M.; Park, Y.S.; Hong, S.K. The Prevalence of Chronic Diseases among Migrants in Korea According to Their Length of Stay and Residential Status. Korean J. Fam. Med. 2012, 33, 34–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gilder, M.E.; Moo, P.; Hashmi, A.; Praisaengdet, N.; Wai, K.; Pimanpanarak, M.; Carrara, V.I.; Angkurawaranon, C.; Jiraporncharoen, W.; McGready, R. “I can’t read and don’t understand”: Health literacy and health messaging about folic acid for neural tube defect prevention in a migrant population on the Myanmar-Thailand border. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0218138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Dependent Variables | Independent Variables |
---|---|
Awareness of public health measures on COVID-19 |
|
Self-reported preventive practices during COVID-19 | Demographic data Resources for supporting preventive practices Health literacy Overall frequency of receiving health information from all sources Knowledge about disease Awareness and attitudes toward public health measures The four constructs of the health belief model (perceived risk, perceived benefit, severity of illness, and perceived barriers) |
Theme | Variables | Type of Variable | Classification |
---|---|---|---|
Demographic data | Gender | Categorical |
|
Age (years) | Continuous, then changed to Categorical |
| |
Ethnicity | Categorical |
| |
Length of stay in Thailand (years) | Continuous, then changed to categorical (cut point by median) |
| |
Education | Categorical |
| |
Occupation | Categorical |
| |
Family members (aged 15 years or above) | Continuous then changed to categorical (using the median as the cut-off point) |
| |
Income (minimum wage: Phuket 336, Ranong 315, Samut Sakhon 331 Baht/day ᵝ) | Categorical then changed to categorical |
| |
Thai Reading Comprehension Thai Listening Comprehension | Categorical |
| |
Health insurance | Categorical |
| |
Access to resources |
| Categorical |
|
Resources supporting access to information (Total score for access to electricity, phone signal, and internet signal: 1–3 for each) | Categorical (using the median as the cut-off point) |
| |
Resources supporting for preventive practices (Total score for access to face mask, soap, alcohol gel, and tap water: 1–3 for each) | Categorical (using the median as the cut-off point) |
| |
Health literacy | Health literacy (Total score for health literacy questions: 1–3 for each question, 12 questions in total) (Example: I can find information on health problems that concern me. (Agree/Neutral/Disagree)) | Categorical (cut-off point of 60% of total score ᵞ) |
|
Source of information | Sources
| Categorical |
|
Score of health information sorted by source
| Categorical (using the median as the cut-off point) |
| |
Overall score for frequency of receiving health information from all sources (Total score for all sources: 1–3 for each question, 8 questions in total) | Categorical (using the median as the cut-off point) |
| |
Knowledge | Knowledge about disease (Total score: 0–1 for each question, 12 questions in total) (Example: Loss of smell or taste is a symptom of COVID-19. (Yes/No)) | Categorical (using the median as the cut-off point) |
|
Awareness of public health measures | Awareness of public health measures (Total score: 0–1 for each question, 5 questions in total) (Example: If people visit Thailand from other countries, they must quarantine for at least 14 days. (Aware/Unaware)) | Categorical (using the median as the cut-off point) |
|
Attitude toward public health measures | Attitude toward public health measures (Total score: 1–3 for each question, 5 questions in total) (Example: Public gatherings are prohibited during COVID-19 outbreaks. (Agree/Neutral/disagree) | Categorical (using the median as the cut-off point) |
|
Self-reported preventive practices | Regular preventive practices for COVID-19 situation (Total score: 0–1 of each, 7 questions in total) (Example: I always wear a mask when I go outside. (Yes/No)) | Categorical (using the median as the cut-off point) |
|
Health belief model | Perceived susceptibility (Total score: 1–3 for each question, 3 questions in total) (Example of questions: I consider myself to be at risk of COVID-19. (Agree/Neutral/Disagree)) | Categorical (cut-off point at the 75th percentile ᵟ) |
|
Perceived severity (Total score: 1–3 for each question, 3 questions in total) (Example: If I get COVID-19, I will probably die. (Agree/Neutral/Disagree)) | Categorical (cut-off point at the 75th percentile ᵟ) |
| |
Perceived benefits (Total score: 1–3 for each question, 3 questions in total) (Example: I think that public health measures are good for me and my family. (Agree/Neutral/Disagree)) | Categorical (cut-off point at the 75th percentile ᵟ) |
| |
Perceived barriers (Total score: 1–3 for each question, 3 questions in total) (Example: I think that public health measures are problematic for my work. (Agree/Neutral/Disagree)) | Categorical (cut-off point at the 75th percentile ᵟ) |
|
Independent Factors | High Level of Awareness, n (%) | Low Level of Awareness, n (%) | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | 0.59 | ||
Female | 157 (83) | 33 (17) | |
Male | 83 (89) | 10 (11) | |
Age (years) | 0.42 | ||
<25 | 31 (82) | 7 (18) | |
25–59 | 207 (85) | 36 (15) | |
≥60 | 3 (100) | 0 | |
Ethnicity | 0.72 | ||
Myanmar | 155 (87) | 24 (13) | |
Non-Myanmar | 84 (82) | 19 (18) | |
Province | 0.59 | ||
Phuket | 4 (80) | 1 (20) | |
Ranong | 68 (91) | 7 (9) | |
Samut Sakhon | 169 (83) | 35 (17) | |
Length of stay in Thailand (years) | 0.03 | ||
≤8 | 135 (91) | 13 (9) | |
>8 | 103 (77) | 30 (23) | |
Education | 0.44 | ||
No formal education | 29 (88) | 4 (12) | |
Primary school | 135 (82) | 29 (18) | |
Secondary school and upper | 77 (89) | 10 (11) | |
Occupation | 0.27 | ||
Unemployed | 41 (77) | 12 (23) | |
Factory worker | 119 (84) | 22 (16) | |
Agriculture/fishery | 25 (93) | 2 (7) | |
Construction worker | 38 (95) | 2 (5) | |
Business/housemaid/waiter | 18 (78) | 5 (22) | |
Thai Reading Comprehension | 0.15 | ||
Cannot understand | 143 (81) | 33 (19) | |
Partially understand | 84 (89) | 10 (11) | |
Fully understand | 13 (100) | 0 | |
Thai Listening Comprehension | 0.41 | ||
Cannot understand | 46 (90) | 5 (10) | |
Partially understand | 134 (87) | 20 (13) | |
Fully understand | 60 (77) | 18 (23) | |
Income | 0.26 | ||
Lower than minimum wage | 153 (83) | 32 (17) | |
Equal to minimum wage | 13 (100) | 0 | |
Higher than minimum wage | 75 (87) | 11 (13) | |
Health insurance | 0.10 | ||
No insurance/unknown | 48 (76) | 15 (24) | |
Health Insurance Card Scheme | 30 (83) | 6 (17) | |
Social Security Scheme | 163 (88) | 22 (12) | |
Resources supporting access to information | 0.96 | ||
Low access | 23 (85) | 4 (15) | |
High access | 217 (85) | 38 (15) | |
Family member (aged ≥ 15 years) | N/A | ||
<2 people | 14 (100) | 0 | |
≥2 people | 168 (82) | 38 (18) | |
Receiving health information from health professionals | 0.37 | ||
Infrequent | 117 (87) | 18 (13) | |
Frequent | 124 (83) | 25 (17) | |
Receiving health information from community members | 0.62 | ||
Infrequent | 54 (84) | 10 (16) | |
Frequent | 186 (85) | 33 (15) | |
Receiving health information from public mass media | 0.75 | ||
Infrequent | 20 (80) | 5 (20) | |
Frequent | 220 (86) | 37 (14) | |
Receiving health information from social media | 0.42 | ||
Infrequent | 76 (80) | 19 (20) | |
Frequent | 165 (87) | 24 (13) |
Independent Factors | High Level of Preventive Practices, n (%) | Low Level of Preventive Practices, n (%) | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | 0.04 | ||
Female | 140 (73) | 51 (27) | |
Male | 79 (85) | 14 (15) | |
Age (years) | 0.03 | ||
<25 | 35 (95) | 2 (5) | |
25–59 | 182 (74) | 63 (26) | |
≥60 | 3 (100) | 0 | |
Ethnicity | 0.09 | ||
Myanmar | 145 (81) | 34 (19) | |
Non-Myanmar | 74 (70) | 31 (30) | |
Province | 0.45 | ||
Phuket | 8 (100) | 0 | |
Ranong | 56 (77) | 17 (23) | |
Samut Sakhon | 156 (76) | 48 (24) | |
Length of stay in Thailand (years) | 0.90 | ||
≤8 | 117 (78) | 33 (22) | |
>8 | 101 (77) | 31 (23) | |
Education | 0.05 | ||
No formal education | 21 (64) | 12 (36) | |
Primary school | 128 (77) | 38 (23) | |
Secondary school and upper | 71 (83) | 15 (17) | |
Occupation | 0.03 | ||
Unemployed | 34 (65) | 18 (35) | |
Factory worker | 111 (79) | 30 (21) | |
Agriculture/fishery | 18 (64) | 10 (36) | |
Construction worker | 38 (93) | 3 (7) | |
Business/housemaid/waiter | 19 (83) | 4 (17) | |
Thai Reading Comprehension | <0.01 | ||
Cannot understand | 126 (71) | 51 (29) | |
Partially understand | 80 (85) | 14 (15) | |
Fully understand | 13 (100) | 0 | |
Thai Listening Comprehension | 0.65 | ||
Cannot understand | 38 (73) | 14 (27) | |
Partially understand | 123 (80) | 31 (20) | |
Fully understand | 58 (74) | 20 (26) | |
Income | 0.16 | ||
Lower than minimum wage | 142 (76) | 44 (24) | |
Equal to minimum wage | 5 (38) | 8 (62) | |
Higher than minimum wage | 73 (85) | 13 (15) | |
Health insurance | <0.01 | ||
No insurance/unknown | 39 (62) | 24 (38) | |
Health Insurance Card Scheme | 30 (83) | 6 (17) | |
Social Security Scheme | 151 (81) | 35 (19) | |
Resources supporting access to preventive practices | 0.39 | ||
Low access | 37 (77) | 11 (23) | |
High access | 181 (77) | 54 (23) | |
Family member (age ≥ 15 years old) | 0.31 | ||
<2 people | 12 (86) | 2 (14) | |
≥2 people | 149 (72) | 58 (28) | |
Overall frequency of receiving health information (all sources combined) | <0.01 | ||
Infrequent | 88 (68) | 42 (32) | |
Frequent | 129 (85) | 22 (15) | |
Health literacy | 0.73 | ||
Low health literacy | 91 (77) | 27 (23) | |
High health literacy | 127 (77) | 37 (23) | |
Positive attitude toward public health measures | 0.69 | ||
Low level of positive attitude | 80 (78) | 23 (22) | |
High level of positive attitude | 136 (77) | 41 (23) | |
Knowledge about disease | 0.33 | ||
Low level of knowledge | 65 (72) | 25 (28) | |
High level of knowledge | 155 (79) | 40 (21) | |
Awareness of public health measures | 0.33 | ||
Low level of awareness | 28 (65) | 15 (35) | |
High level of awareness | 188 (79) | 50 (21) | |
Perceived susceptibility | 0.08 | ||
Low/moderate perception | 160 (75) | 52 (25) | |
High perception | 60 (83) | 12 (17) | |
Perceived severity | 0.10 | ||
Low/moderate perception | 140 (74) | 49 (26) | |
High perception | 79 (83) | 16 (17) | |
Perceived benefits | 0.83 | ||
Low/moderate perception | 102 (76) | 33 (24) | |
High perception | 117 (79) | 32 (21) | |
Perceived barriers | 0.03 | ||
Low/moderate perception | 149 (74) | 53 (26) | |
High perception | 70 (85) | 12 (15) |
Selected Factors | Adjusted OR (95% CI) | p-Value |
---|---|---|
Length of stay in Thailand | ||
≤8 years | reference | |
>8 years | 0.43 (0.19–0.95) | 0.04 |
Insurance | ||
No insurance/unknown | reference | reference |
Social Security scheme | 2.02 (0.81–5.06) | 0.13 |
Health insurance card scheme | 1.78 (0.54–5.85) | 0.35 |
Selected Factors | Adjusted OR (95% CI) | p-Value |
---|---|---|
Gender | ||
Female | reference | |
Male | 1.08 (0.46–2.54) | 0.86 |
Age (years) | ||
<25 | reference | |
25–59 | 0.15 (0.03–0.72) | 0.02 |
≥60 | NA | NA |
Ethnicity | ||
Myanmar | reference | |
Non-Myanmar | 0.63 (0.29–1.35) | 0.24 |
Education | ||
No formal education | reference | |
Primary school | 3.24 (1.18–8.93) | 0.02 |
Secondary school and upper | 2.64 (0.85–8.16) | 0.09 |
Occupation | ||
Unemployed | reference | |
Factory worker | 0.46 (0.09–2.49) | 0.37 |
Agriculture/fishery | 0.38 (0.09–1.59) | 0.18 |
Construction worker | 2.20 (0.31–15.51) | 0.43 |
Business/housemaid/waiter | 0.77 (0.16–3.59) | 0.74 |
Thai Reading Comprehension | ||
Cannot understand | reference | |
Partially understand | 1.71 (0.72–4.05) | 0.22 |
Fully understand | NA | NA |
Insurance | ||
No insurance/unknown | reference | |
Health insurance card scheme | 2.46 (0.64–9.43) | 0.19 |
Social Security scheme | 2.49 (0.58–10.62) | 0.22 |
Overall frequency of receiving health information (all sources combined) | ||
Infrequent | reference | |
Frequent | 4.20 (1.95–9.03) | <0.01 |
Perceived susceptibility | ||
Low/moderate perception | reference | |
High perception | 0.98 (0.37–2.60) | 0.97 |
Perceived severity | ||
Low/moderate perception | reference | |
High perception | 1.18 (0.47–3.00) | 0.72 |
Perceived barriers | ||
Low/moderate perception | reference | |
High perception | 0.97 (0.38–2.48) | 0.95 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Papwijitsil, R.; Kosiyaporn, H.; Sinam, P.; Phaiyarom, M.; Julchoo, S.; Suphanchaimat, R. Factors Related to Health Risk Communication Outcomes among Migrant Workers in Thailand during COVID-19: A Case Study of Three Provinces. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 11474. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111474
Papwijitsil R, Kosiyaporn H, Sinam P, Phaiyarom M, Julchoo S, Suphanchaimat R. Factors Related to Health Risk Communication Outcomes among Migrant Workers in Thailand during COVID-19: A Case Study of Three Provinces. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(21):11474. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111474
Chicago/Turabian StylePapwijitsil, Ratchadaporn, Hathairat Kosiyaporn, Pigunkaew Sinam, Mathudara Phaiyarom, Sataporn Julchoo, and Rapeepong Suphanchaimat. 2021. "Factors Related to Health Risk Communication Outcomes among Migrant Workers in Thailand during COVID-19: A Case Study of Three Provinces" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 21: 11474. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111474