↓ Skip to main content

Socio-demographic factors influencing knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) regarding malaria in Bangladesh

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
203 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
Socio-demographic factors influencing knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) regarding malaria in Bangladesh
Published in
BMC Public Health, December 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-12-1084
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kabirul Bashar, H M Al-Amin, Md Selim Reza, Muzahidul Islam, Asaduzzaman, Touhid Uddin Ahmed

Abstract

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: A clear understanding of the social and behavioral risk factors, and knowledge gaps, related to exposure to malaria are essential when developing guidelines and recommendations for more effective disease prevention in many malaria endemic areas of the world including Bangladesh and elsewhere in the South East Asia. To-date, the level of knowledge that human populations, residing in moderate to high malaria risk zones, have with respect to the basic pathogen transmission dynamics, risk factors for malaria or disease preventative strategies, has not been assessed in Bangladesh. The purpose of this study was to address this gap by conducting surveys of the knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) of people, from variable socio-demographic backgrounds, residing in selected rural malaria endemic areas in Bangladesh. METHODS: The KAP survey was conducted in portions of six different malaria endemic districts in Bangladesh from July to October 2011. The survey consisted of interviewing residence of these malaria endemic districts using a structured questionnaire and interviewers also completed observational checklists at each household where people were interviewed. The study area was further divided into two zones (1 and 2) based on differences in the physical geography and level of malaria endemicity in the two zones. Data from the questionnaires and observational checklists were analysised using Statistical Package for Social Sciences 16.0 (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). RESULTS: A total of 468 individuals from individual households were interviewed, and most respondents were female. Monthly incomes varied within and among the zones. It was found that 46.4 % and 41% of respondents' family had malaria within the past one year in zones 1 and 2, respectively. Nearly 86% of the respondents did not know the exact cause of malaria or the role of Anopheles mosquitoes in the pathogen's transmission. Knowledge on malaria transmission and symptoms of the respondents of zones 1 and 2 were significantly (p<0.01) different. The majority of respondents from both zones believed that bed nets were the main protective measure against malaria, but a significant relationship was not found between the use of bed net and prevalence of malaria. A significant relationship (p<0.05) between level of education with malaria prevalence was found in zone 1. There was a positive correlation between the number of family members and the prevalence of malaria. Houses with walls had a strong positive association with malaria. Approximately 50% of the households of zones 1 and 2 maintained that they suffered from malaria within the last year. A significant association (p<0.01) between malaria and the possession of domestic animals in their houses was found in both zones. People who spent time outside in the evening were more likely to contract malaria than those who did not. CONCLUSION: To address the shortcomings in local knowledge about malaria, health personnel working in malaria endemic areas should be trained to give more appropriate counseling in an effort to change certain deeply entrenched traditional behaviors such as spending time outdoors in the evening, improper use of bed nets and irregular use of insecticides during sleep.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 203 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Bangladesh 2 <1%
Ethiopia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Madagascar 1 <1%
Unknown 195 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 32 16%
Student > Master 27 13%
Researcher 21 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 10%
Student > Postgraduate 11 5%
Other 32 16%
Unknown 59 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 9%
Social Sciences 12 6%
Environmental Science 11 5%
Other 35 17%
Unknown 65 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 05 April 2016.
All research outputs
#6,918,838
of 22,689,790 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,273
of 14,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,345
of 280,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#123
of 282 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,689,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,764 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 280,030 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 282 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 54% of its contemporaries.