Discussion
Despite certain limitations in the study methodology,
mainly due to the need to produce simple questions
understandable to all groups, our study revealed a number
of important differences between KAPs of urban
and rural populations for AI. Multivariate analysis
demonstrated that age and level of education were likely
the main factors giving rise to these differences. The
study showed a high degree of awareness of human AI
in both urban and rural regions. Awareness evaluations
in Thailand [12] and Cambodia [13] after their 2004-
2005 AI outbreaks gave similarly high percentages.
Television was found to be the most effective way to
disseminate information on AI in both groups, followed
by newspapers in the urban group and family/friends in
the rural community. A significant percentage of both
groups requested additional information; television,
again, being the preferred source. These results confirm
findings in Thailand where television proved to be the
most efficient source of information [12].
The percentage of participants with ‘knowledge associated
with human AI’ was low, especially in the rural
areas where education levels were lower. Olsen et al
[12] also found very low percentages of basic knowledge
of human AI in rural Thailand before public education
campaigns. However, in Italy, Abbate et al [11] found
64% of 284 poultry workers correctly defined AI as a