↓ Skip to main content

Household costs for personal protection against mosquitoes: secondary outcomes from a randomised controlled trial of dengue prevention in Guerrero state, Mexico

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 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
Household costs for personal protection against mosquitoes: secondary outcomes from a randomised controlled trial of dengue prevention in Guerrero state, Mexico
Published in
BMC Public Health, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4303-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

José Legorreta-Soberanis, Sergio Paredes-Solís, Arcadio Morales-Pérez, Elizabeth Nava-Aguilera, Felipe René Serrano-de los Santos, Belén Madeline Sánchez-Gervacio, Robert J. Ledogar, Anne Cockcroft, Neil Andersson

Abstract

Dengue is a serious public health issue that affects households in endemic areas in terms of health and also economically, imposing costs for prevention and treatment of cases. The Camino Verde cluster-randomised controlled trial in Mexico and Nicaragua assessed the impact of evidence-based community engagement in dengue prevention. The Mexican arm of the trial was conducted in 90 randomly selected communities in three coastal regions of Guerrero State. This study reports an analysis of a secondary outcome of the trial: household use of and expenditure on anti-mosquito products. We examined whether the education and mobilisation activities of the trial motivated people to spend less on anti-mosquito products. We carried out a household questionnaire survey in the trial communities in 2010 (12,312 households) and 2012 (5349 households in intervention clusters, 5142 households in control clusters), including questions about socio-economic status, self-reported dengue illness, and purchase of and expenditure on insecticide anti-mosquito products in the previous month. We examined expenditures on anti-mosquito products at baseline in relation to social vulnerability and we compared use of and expenditures on these products between intervention and control clusters in 2012. In 2010, 44.2% of 12,312 households reported using anti-mosquito products, with a mean expenditure of USD4.61 per month among those who used them. Socially vulnerable households spent less on the products. In 2012, after the intervention, the proportion of households who purchased anti-mosquito products in the last month was significantly lower in intervention clusters (47.8%; 2503/5293) than in control clusters (53.3%; 2707/5079) (difference - 0.05, 95% CIca -0.100 to -0.010). The mean expenditure on the products, among those households who bought them, was USD6.43; 30.4% in the intervention clusters and 36.7% in the control clusters spent more than this (difference - 0.06, 95% CIca -0.12 to -0.01). These expenditures on anti-mosquito products represent 3.3% and 3.8% respectively of monthly household income for the poorest 10% of the population in 2012. The Camino Verde community mobilisation intervention, as well as being effective in reducing dengue infections, was effective in reducing household use of and expenditure on insecticide anti-mosquito products. ( ISRCTN27581154 ).

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 97 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 15%
Researcher 12 12%
Student > Master 11 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Lecturer 4 4%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 31 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 15%
Social Sciences 11 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 6%
Environmental Science 6 6%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 34 35%

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 05 January 2018.
All research outputs
#10,971,951
of 12,380,418 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,863
of 8,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#292,885
of 351,891 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#277
of 298 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,380,418 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,376 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 351,891 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 298 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.