The following sections present a detailed examination of the results, their implications, and potential strategies to address identified gaps in health awareness and engagement. While some comparisons revealed statistically significant differences (e.g., p < 0.05), effect sizes (e.g., Cramér’s V = 0.07) were small, suggesting modest group differences in respiratory health-related behaviors. These findings reveal subtle but statistically significant trends in practice.
The study surveyed 823 Saudi healthcare students, as presented in Table 1; Fig. 1, with a higher proportion of females (56.6%) than males (43.4%). Most respondents (93.9%) were aged 18–24, indicating they are early in their academic careers. A small percentage were older students (25–30 years: 4.9%, 31–35 years: 0.9%, 36 years and above: 0.4%). Nursing students comprised the largest group (31.8%), followed by medicine (19.7%) and clinical dietetics (17.5%). Other disciplines included pharmacy, public health, and more. Most participants were undergraduates (96.8%), with first-year (28.1%) and fourth-year (26.7%) students being the most common. Geographically, most students were from the Eastern Province (57.2%), followed by the Central (15.3%) and Western (10.2%) Provinces. Although the majority (95.9%) of respondents attended public universities, this may reflect a sampling limitation rather than the actual distribution of healthcare students in Saudi Arabia, where numerous private universities operate across different regions.
Awareness of honey and yoghurt benefits by gender.
Awareness level classification: high (≥ 70%), moderate (50–69%), low (< 50%)
Table 2 shows that many Saudi healthcare students demonstrated general awareness of the benefits of honey and yoghurt for respiratory health. In this study, general awareness was defined as ≥ 70% of participants providing correct or affirmative responses to individual knowledge items. Based on this criterion, 71.0% of respondents recognized honey as a prebiotic supporting immune function, while 76.2% identified yoghurt as a probiotic that can enhance gut health and potentially reduce respiratory infections. Additionally, honey was commonly associated with sore throat (81.7%) and flu symptoms (70.5%), and yoghurt with gut health (85.3%) and respiratory infections (53.5%). Gender-based analysis revealed that females consistently demonstrated slightly higher awareness than males, for example, 73.2% of females versus 68.1% of males identified honey’s prebiotic role, and 79.2% versus 72.3% identified yoghurt’s probiotic role. A greater proportion of males also selected “I don’t know,” suggesting comparatively higher uncertainty and knowledge gaps in this subgroup.
Frequency of practices and usage of honey and yoghurt for respiratory health.
The data from Fig. 2 indicates that a considerable proportion of Saudi healthcare students incorporate honey and yoghurt into their practices for managing respiratory health. However, confidence in recommending these natural remedies varies. A majority (31.0%) reported using honey sometimes, while 26.5% used it often and 19.3% always, with similar trends observed across genders. Yoghurt consumption followed a comparable pattern, with 31.6% consuming it sometimes, 27.3% usually, and 20.2% always, with females exhibiting slightly higher consumption rates. Despite these usage trends, only 55.7% of students felt confident recommending honey, and 51.0% recommended yoghurt for respiratory health. Notably, a substantial proportion of respondents lacked confidence in making recommendations—25.7% for honey and 28.3% for yoghurt. These findings suggest a positive perception of honey and yoghurt as respiratory health aids but highlight the need for further education and training to strengthen healthcare students’ confidence in endorsing natural remedies as part of patient care.
Rank: 1 highest − 5 lowest
Table 3 shows that many Saudi healthcare students have high confidence in honey (49.8%) and yoghurt (46.8%) as beneficial for respiratory health, with only a small percentage reporting low confidence (19.8% for honey and 21.6% for yoghurt). Confidence levels are similar between male and female respondents. The main barriers to recommending honey and yoghurt are a lack of evidence and limited knowledge, with patient preferences also playing a role. Cultural factors have a minor impact on hesitancy. These findings suggest that improving education and integrating clinical research could increase students’ confidence in using honey and yoghurt in patient care.
Data analysis from Table 4 indicates that honey (39.5%) is the most preferred natural remedy for respiratory health among Saudi healthcare students, followed by yoghurt (26.9%). In comparison, 22.7% consider both equally beneficial, and 10.9% do not feel confident recommending either. This suggests a general inclination toward honey but also highlights a lack of strong consensus. In terms of education preparedness, only 36.2% of students feel adequately trained to recommend honey and yoghurt for respiratory health, whereas 42.9% believe their education has not prepared them well, reflecting a significant gap in formal training on natural remedies. However, awareness of honey side effects varies, with 51.6% acknowledging potential risks, 28.2% unaware, and 20.2% uncertain, underscoring the need for better education on both the benefits and possible drawbacks of natural treatments to ensure informed clinical recommendations.
Table 5 revealed gender-based differences in knowledge and use of honey and yoghurt for respiratory health. While 45.9% had high knowledge of honey’s benefits, males (48.2%) had slightly higher knowledge than females (44.2%), with a statistically significant but small effect (p = 0.040, Cramér’s V = 0.07). Knowledge of yoghurt’s benefits was lower (37.9%), with no significant gender difference. Males reported more frequent honey use (51.5% vs. 48.9%, p = 0.015), while females consumed more yoghurt (40.3% vs. 35.6%), though the difference was not significant. Females (71.2%) were more likely to recommend honey for respiratory health than males (67.2%) (p = 0.009), despite males having higher knowledge and use. Confidence in recommending yoghurt was low overall (54.4%) with no significant gender difference (p = 0.097). These results suggest that although males have more knowledge and use honey more, females are more likely to recommend it, indicating a possible confidence gap among males. All genders underutilize yoghurt, indicating a need for targeted education to boost confidence in recommending natural remedies. Further research should explore barriers like perceived efficacy, cultural beliefs, and gaps in training.
Table 6 highlights gender-based and discipline-specific differences in the awareness, attitudes, and use of honey and yoghurt for respiratory health among Saudi healthcare students. About 50.3% of respondents reported regular use of honey, with males (51.5%) using it slightly more than females (48.9%). Knowledge of honey’s benefits was reported by 45.9% of the total sample, with males (48.2%) again showing higher awareness than females (44.2%). Similarly, awareness of yoghurt’s benefits was lower overall (37.9%), with males (39.1%) slightly leading females (36.9%).
Medical students demonstrated the highest levels of awareness regarding both honey (53.7%) and yoghurt (45.7%), and were also the most confident in recommending these remedies. Nursing students followed closely (50.0%), whereas health informatics, public health, and other non-clinical disciplines reported the lowest levels of awareness and confidence. In terms of confidence in recommending honey and yoghurt, males were slightly more confident overall than females (44.9% vs. 41.2%). However, only 30.8% of all students felt that their education had adequately prepared them to recommend these remedies, with medical and nursing students being 1.48 times more likely to report feeling prepared (p = 0.032).
Although previous sections noted that female students showed slightly higher awareness in self-reported responses (e.g., survey items on usage or perceived benefits), Table 6 reflects actual knowledge-based scores, where males scored marginally higher. This distinction suggests that female participants may exhibit greater subjective awareness or engagement, while male students demonstrated higher objective knowledge scores. This clarification helps resolve the apparent contradiction between the gender-awareness statement and Table 6 findings.
The results underscore significant differences based on both gender and academic discipline (p < 0.05), emphasizing the need for targeted educational enhancements, particularly in programs where awareness and confidence levels are lower.
The comparative analysis of gender and geographical location, as presented in Table 7, reveals significant disparities in knowledge, practices, awareness, and attitudes toward using honey and yoghurt for respiratory health. Females showed slightly higher awareness of honey’s prebiotic and yoghurt’s probiotic benefits, but their confidence in recommending these remedies was lower (Chi-Square, p < 0.05). Participants from the Eastern and Southern provinces had the highest knowledge, while those from the Western and Northern regions scored lower, suggesting gaps in health education. Males consumed more honey, while females consumed more yoghurt, with smokers reporting lower consumption of both (ANOVA, p = 0.048). Confidence in recommending these remedies was higher in males and those from the Central and Eastern provinces (T-Test, p < 0.05). Logistic regression indicated that those well-educated about natural remedies were 1.42 times more likely to recommend them (p < 0.05). These findings highlight the need for targeted educational interventions, such as training and region-specific awareness campaigns, to enhance knowledge and confidence in using natural remedies in healthcare.
Data analysis from Table 8 reveals significant differences in knowledge, practices, awareness, perception, and recommendations based on gender, geographical location, and smoking status. Females outperformed males in all categories, with higher scores in knowledge (3.9 vs. 3.4), practices (3.7 vs. 3.1), awareness (4.2 vs. 3.6), perception (3.9 vs. 3.3), and recommendations (4.0 vs. 3.5). Regional disparities were evident, with the Eastern Province scoring highest in knowledge (4.1). In contrast, the Northern Province scored the lowest (3.0). Smoking negatively affects health practices and awareness, with smokers scoring lower (2.7) than non-smokers. Logistic regression showed females and non-smokers were more likely to have positive views on respiratory health interventions. Multivariate regression supported the need for targeted health campaigns, particularly for males, smokers, and regions with lower awareness.
link