↓ Skip to main content

Rural households at risk of malaria did not own sufficient insecticide treated nets at Dabat HDSS site: evidence from a cross sectional re-census

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
Rural households at risk of malaria did not own sufficient insecticide treated nets at Dabat HDSS site: evidence from a cross sectional re-census
Published in
BMC Public Health, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4906-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kindie Fentahun Muchie, Kassahun Alemu, Amare Tariku, Adino Tesfahun Tsegaye, Solomon Mekonnen Abebe, Mezgebu Yitayal, Tadesse Awoke, Gashaw Andargie Biks

Abstract

Malaria is the leading cause of disease burden across the world, especially in African countries. Ethiopia has designed a five year (2011-2015) plan to cover 100% of the households in malarious areas with one insecticide treated net (ITN) for every two persons, and to raise consistent ITN utilization to at least 80%. However, evidence on ownership of ITN among malarious rural households in northwest Ethiopia is quite limited. Hence, the present study aimed at assessing ownership of ITN and associated factors among rural households at risk of malaria at Dabat Health and Demographic Surveillance System site, northwest Ethiopia. A cross sectional re-census was carried out in Dabat Health and Demographic Surveillance System site during peak malaria seasons from October to December, 2014. Data for 15,088 households at Dabat Health and Demographic Surveillance System site were used for the analysis. Descriptive measures and binary logistic regression were carried out. Among those who owned at least one ITN, 53.4% were living at an altitude >2500 m above sea level. However, out of households living at an altitude <2000 m above sea level, 15.8% (95% CI 14.4%, 17.3%) owned ITN at an average of 4.3 ± 2.1 persons per ITN. Of these, 69.5% (95% CI 64.7%, 74.1%) used the ITN. Among utilizing households at malarious areas, 23.7% prioritized pregnant women and 31.4% children to use ITN. The availability of radio receiver/mobile (AOR 1.60, 95%CI 1.08, 2.35) and secondary/above educational status of household member (AOR 1.54, 95%CI 1.19, 2.04) were predictors of ownership of ITN. Rural households at risk of malaria did not own a sufficient number of ITN though the utilization is promising. Moreover, prioritizing children and pregnant women to sleep under ITN remains public health problems. Programmers, partners and implementers should consider tailored intervention strategy stratified by altitude in distributing ITN. ITN distribution should also be accompanied by using exhaustive promotion strategies that consider people without access to any source of information, and educating households to prioritize pregnant and under five children to sleep under ITN.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Researcher 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 3%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 24 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 14%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 24 36%

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 23 November 2017.
All research outputs
#9,738,141
of 12,181,658 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,082
of 8,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,396
of 337,146 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#190
of 237 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,181,658 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 8,244 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 337,146 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 237 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.