↓ Skip to main content

A comparison of malaria prevalence, control and management strategies in irrigated and non-irrigated areas in eastern Kenya

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A comparison of malaria prevalence, control and management strategies in irrigated and non-irrigated areas in eastern Kenya
Published in
Malaria Journal, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1458-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

John Muthii Muriuki, Philip Kitala, Gerald Muchemi, Ian Njeru, Joan Karanja, Bernard Bett

Abstract

This study was conducted in Bura irrigation scheme in Tana River County and the pastoral area in Ijara, Garissa County in the eastern Kenya to establish the knowledge, attitude and practices on malaria transmission, control and management, and determine malaria prevalence and the associated risk factors. A cross sectional survey design that involved 493 randomly selected people from 334 households was used between November and December 2013. All the randomly selected people were screened for malaria parasites using rapid diagnostic test (RDT)-Carestart™ malaria HRP2 (pf) kit. A questionnaire was administered to determine potential risk factors and perceptions on malaria exposure within a period of 2 months prior to the survey. Two logistic regression models were fitted to the data; one used the RDT results while the other used data from the questionnaire survey. Using RDT, the prevalence of malaria was 4.68 % (95 % CI: 1.48-7.88 %) and 0.31 % (-0.30 to 0.92 %) in irrigated and non-irrigated areas, respectively. From the questionnaires, 14.62 % (9.27-19.97 %) and 23.91 % (19.23-28.60 %) of the participants perceived to have had malaria in the irrigated and pastoral areas, respectively. The main malaria control measure was the use of bed nets: average of three nets per household in Bura irrigation scheme and one in Ijara. Artemether-lumefantrine was the main drug of choice mainly in the irrigated area while sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine was likely to be used in the non-irrigated area. Households located >5 km from the nearest health facility had higher prevalence of Plasmodium infection than those located ≤5 km. The residents of Bura irrigation scheme were more likely to be infected compared to those living in the non-irrigated area of Ijara. However, those in the non-irrigated area were more likely to be treated or use over-the-counter medication for perceived malaria illnesses compared to those in the irrigated area. There is a need, therefore, to formulate effective ways of managing malaria especially in irrigated areas and build capacity on differential diagnosis for malaria, especially in the pastoral areas.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 2%
Unknown 57 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 33%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 24%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 3%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 9 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 12%
Social Sciences 5 9%
Environmental Science 4 7%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 14 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 November 2016.
All research outputs
#4,156,079
of 16,330,379 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,168
of 4,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,514
of 267,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,330,379 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,600 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,812 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them