↓ Skip to main content

Monitoring of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) coverage versus utilization: a community-based survey in malaria endemic villages of Central India

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 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
Monitoring of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) coverage versus utilization: a community-based survey in malaria endemic villages of Central India
Published in
Malaria Journal, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12936-017-2117-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kamaraju Raghavendra, Mehul Kumar Chourasia, Dipak Kumar Swain, Rajendra M. Bhatt, Sreehari Uragayala, G. D. P. Dutta, Immo Kleinschmidt

Abstract

Despite the known effectiveness of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) in providing protection against malaria, high level of ownership and use are very difficult to achieve and maintain. Nearly 40,000 LLINs were distributed in 2014 as an intervention tool against malaria transmission in 80 villages of Keshkal sub-district in Chhattisgarh, India. This study assessed LLIN coverage, access, utilization pattern, and key determinants for the net use 1 year after mass distribution. In 2015, a cross-sectional household survey was carried out in 80 study clusters (whole village or part of village). From each cluster, 40 households were randomly selected and interviewed using a structured questionnaire adapted from the malaria indicator survey of Roll Back Malaria guidelines. Information on demographic characteristics, LLIN ownership, and its use on the night before the survey, and physical condition of LLINs were recorded. 2970 households were interviewed with a total of 15,003 individuals present in the households during the night before the survey. Nearly 98% of households had at least one LLIN and 59.4% of the surveyed population reportedly used an LLIN the previous night. LLIN use varied from 41 to 94% between the study clusters. Nearly 89% of the LLINs were found in good physical condition (without holes). However, proportion of household with at least one LLIN per two persons was only 39%. Universal coverage of LLINs was inadequate in the study clusters making it difficult for all household members to use an LLIN. LLIN use varied between clusters and was highest in children under 5 years of age. Health education campaigns and creating awareness about the benefit of sleeping under the LLINs in providing protection against malaria is required not only to high risk groups of pregnant women and children below 5 years of age but all the members of the family to have an epidemiological impact of this intervention at the community level. Relatively high net use despite poor access to LLINs indicates an overall desire to use nets when they are available. The main barrier to increased use of nets is the low coverage at household level.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 106 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 21%
Researcher 19 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 30 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 6%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 33 31%
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 24 November 2017.
All research outputs
#7,843,902
of 24,580,204 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#2,263
of 5,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,992
of 441,420 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#41
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,580,204 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 441,420 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 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 59% of its contemporaries.