↓ Skip to main content

Field assessment of a novel spatial repellent for malaria control: a feasibility and acceptability study in Mondulkiri, Cambodia

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
Field assessment of a novel spatial repellent for malaria control: a feasibility and acceptability study in Mondulkiri, Cambodia
Published in
Malaria Journal, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12936-017-2059-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marco Liverani, Jacques Derek Charlwood, Harriet Lawford, Shunmay Yeung

Abstract

Large-scale use of insecticide-treated nets and indoor residual spraying have contributed to a significant decrease in malaria transmission worldwide. Further reduction and progress towards elimination, however, require complementary control measures which can address the remaining gaps in protection from mosquito bites. Following the development of novel pyrethroids with high knockdown effects on malaria vectors, programmatic use of spatial repellents has been suggested as one potential strategy to fill the gaps. This report explores social and contextual factors that may influence the relevance, uptake and sustainable use of a spatial repellent in two remote villages in Mondulkiri province, Cambodia, with endemic malaria transmission. The repellent consisted of polyethylene emanators, held in an open plastic frame and impregnated with 10% metofluthrin. In a baseline survey, 90.9% of households in Ou Chra (n = 30/33) and 96.6% in Pu Cha (n = 57/59) were interviewed. Behavioural data were collected for all household occupants (n = 448). In both villages, there were times and places in which people remained exposed to mosquito bites. Prior to the installation of the repellent, 50.6 and 59.5% of respondents noted that bites occurred "very often" inside the house and in the outdoor area surrounding the house, respectively. Indoor biting was reported to occur more frequently in the evening, followed by at night, while outdoor biting occurred more frequently in the early morning. In a follow-up survey, spatial repellents were well received in both villages, although 63.2% of respondents would not replace bed nets with repellents. Most participants (96.6%) were willing to use the product again; the mean willingness to pay was US$ 0.3 per unit. A preference for local procurement methods emerged. Widespread use of spatial repellents would not fill all protective gaps, but, if their entomological efficacy can be ascertained, outdoor application has the potential to enhance vector control strategies in Cambodia. Successful implementation would require subsidisation and integration with the existing national malaria control strategy. It is hoped that this study, while contributing to a better understanding of the social contexts of residual malaria transmission, will generate further interest in the evaluation of spatial repellents for malaria control.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 18%
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Master 9 13%
Other 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 22 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 27 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 17 October 2017.
All research outputs
#15,208,612
of 24,580,204 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#3,839
of 5,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,872
of 330,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#96
of 128 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,580,204 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,786 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 330,721 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 128 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.