↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of community-based continuous distribution of long-lasting insecticide-treated nets in Toamasina II District, Madagascar

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Evaluation of community-based continuous distribution of long-lasting insecticide-treated nets in Toamasina II District, Madagascar
Published in
Malaria Journal, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12936-017-1985-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Celine Zegers de Beyl, Albert Kilian, Andrea Brown, Mohamad Sy-Ar, Richmond Ato Selby, Felicien Randriamanantenasoa, Jocelyn Ranaivosoa, Sixte Zigirumugabe, Lilia Gerberg, Megan Fotheringham, Matthew Lynch, Hannah Koenker

Abstract

Continuous distribution of insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) is thought to be an effective mechanism to maintain ITN ownership and access between or in the absence of mass campaigns, but evidence is limited. A community-based ITN distribution pilot was implemented and evaluated in Toamasina II District, Madagascar, to assess this new channel for continuous ITN distribution. Beginning 9 months after the December 2012 mass campaign, a community-based distribution pilot ran for an additional 9 months, from September 2013 to June 2014. Households requested ITN coupons from community agents in their village. After verification by the agents, households exchanged the coupon for an ITN at a distribution point. The evaluation was a two-stage cluster survey with a sample size of 1125 households. Counterfactual ITN ownership and access were calculated by excluding ITNs received through the community pilot. At the end of the pilot, household ownership of any ITN was 96.5%, population access to ITN was 81.5 and 61.5% of households owned at least 1 ITN for every 2 people. Without the ITNs provided through the community channel, household ownership of any ITN was estimated at 74.6%, population access to an ITN at 55.5%, and households that owned at least 1 ITN for 2 people at only 34.7%, 18 months after the 2012 campaign. Ownership of community-distributed ITNs was higher among the poorest wealth quintiles. Over 80% of respondents felt the community scheme was fair and simple to use. Household ITN ownership and population ITN access exceeded RBM targets after the 9-month community distribution pilot. The pilot successfully provided coupons and ITNs to households requesting them, particularly for the least poor wealth quintiles, and the scheme was well-perceived by communities. Further research is needed to determine whether community-based distribution can sustain ITN ownership and access over the long term, how continuous availability of ITNs affects household net replacement behaviour, and whether community-based distribution is cost-effective when combined with mass campaigns, or if used with other continuous channels instead of mass campaigns.

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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 24%
Researcher 6 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 5%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 14 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 10%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Chemistry 2 5%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 18 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 12 August 2017.
All research outputs
#18,567,744
of 22,997,544 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#5,067
of 5,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#243,558
of 318,015 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#128
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,997,544 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,593 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 318,015 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 129 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.