↓ Skip to main content

Long-lasting insecticidal net (LLIN) ownership, use and cost of implementation after a mass distribution campaign in Kasaï Occidental Province, Democratic Republic of Congo

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 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
Long-lasting insecticidal net (LLIN) ownership, use and cost of implementation after a mass distribution campaign in Kasaï Occidental Province, Democratic Republic of Congo
Published in
Malaria Journal, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1671-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Henry Maggi Ntuku, Laura Ruckstuhl, Jean-Emmanuel Julo-Réminiac, Solange E. Umesumbu, Alain Bokota, Antoinette Kitoto Tshefu, Christian Lengeler

Abstract

Long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLIN) are a highly effective means for preventing malaria infection and reducing associated morbidity and mortality. Mass free distribution campaigns have been shown to rapidly increase LLIN ownership and use. Around 3.5 million LLINs were distributed free of charge in the Kasaï Occidental Province in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in September-October 2014, using two different approaches, a fixed delivery strategy and a door-to-door strategy including hang-up activities. Repeated community-based cross-sectional surveys were conducted 2 months before and six months after the mass distribution. Descriptive statistics were used to measure changes in key malaria household indicators. LLIN ownership and use were compared between delivery strategies. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with LLIN use before and after the mass distribution. A comparative financial cost analysis between the fixed delivery and door-to-door distribution strategies was carried out from the provider's perspective. Household ownership of at least one LLIN increased from 39.4% pre-campaign to 91.4% post-campaign and LLIN universal coverage, measured as the proportion of households with at least one LLIN for every two people increased from 4.1 to 41.1%. Population access to LLIN within the household increased from 22.2 to 80.7%, while overall LLIN use increased from 18.0 to 68.3%. Higher LLIN ownership was achieved with the fixed delivery strategy compared with the door-to-door (92.5% [95% CI 90.2-94.4%] versus 85.2% [95% CI 78.5-90.0%]), while distribution strategy did not have a significant impact on LLIN use (69.6% [95% CI 63.1-75.5%] versus 65.7% [95% CI 52.7-76.7%]). Malaria prevalence among children aged 6-59 months was 44.8% post-campaign. Living in a household with sufficient numbers of LLIN to cover all members was the strongest determinant of LLIN use. The total financial cost per LLIN distributed was 6.58 USD for the fixed distribution strategy and 6.61 USD for the door-to-door strategy. The mass distribution campaign was effective for rapidly increasing LLIN ownership and use. These gains need to be sustained for long-term reduction in malaria burden. The fixed delivery strategy achieved a higher LLIN coverage at lower delivery cost compared with the door-to-door strategy and seems to be a better distribution strategy in the context of the present study setting.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 143 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 20%
Researcher 21 15%
Student > Bachelor 17 12%
Student > Postgraduate 10 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 6%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 42 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 8%
Social Sciences 10 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 3%
Other 23 16%
Unknown 50 35%

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 26 January 2017.
All research outputs
#2,844,897
of 11,314,369 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#978
of 3,349 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,624
of 316,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#30
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,314,369 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 3,349 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. 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 316,662 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 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 74% of its contemporaries.