↓ Skip to main content

High mobility, low access thwarts interventions among seasonal workers in the Greater Mekong Sub-region: lessons from the malaria containment project

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 (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 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
High mobility, low access thwarts interventions among seasonal workers in the Greater Mekong Sub-region: lessons from the malaria containment project
Published in
Malaria Journal, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1491-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sara E. Canavati, Cesia E. Quintero, Harriet L. S. Lawford, Sovann Yok, Dysoley Lek, Jack S. Richards, Maxine Anne Whittaker

Abstract

During the process of malaria elimination in the Greater Mekong Sub-region, mobile and migrant populations (MMPs) have been identified as the most at-risk demographic. An important sub-group of MMPs are seasonal workers, and this paper presents an evaluation of the reach and effectiveness of interventions tailored towards this group and was carried out as part of the Containment Project from 2009-11. A mixed-methods study was conducted in Pailin Province in Western Cambodia. Three-hundred-and-four seasonal workers were surveyed using a structured questionnaire. Qualitative data were gathered through a total of eight focus group discussions and 14 in-depth interviews. Data triangulation of the qualitative and quantitative data was used during analysis. High mobility and low access of the target population to the interventions, as well as lack of social and anthropological research that led to implementation oversights, resulted in under-exposure of seasonal workers to interventions. Consequently, their reach and impact were severely limited. Some services, particularly Mobile Malaria Workers, had the ability to significantly impact key factors, such as risky behaviours among those they did reach. Others, like Listening and Viewing Clubs and mass media campaigns, showed little impact. There is potential in two of the interventions assessed, but high mobility and inadequate exposure of seasonal workers to these interventions must be considered in the development and planning of future interventions to avoid investing in low-impact activities and ensure that all interventions perform according to their maximum potential. This will be critical in order for Cambodia to achieve its aim of malaria elimination. The lessons learned from this study can be extrapolated to other areas of health care in Cambodia and other countries in order to reduce the gap between healthcare provided to MMPs, especially seasonal workers, and to the general population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Bangladesh 1 <1%
Unknown 110 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 18%
Student > Master 17 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Student > Bachelor 5 5%
Other 23 21%
Unknown 30 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 11%
Social Sciences 8 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 20 18%
Unknown 38 34%
Attention Score in Context

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 20 July 2022.
All research outputs
#6,430,117
of 24,400,706 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,657
of 5,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,560
of 344,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#40
of 139 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,400,706 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,827 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 344,879 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 139 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.