↓ Skip to main content

Long lasting insecticidal net use and its associated factors in Limmu Seka District, South West Ethiopia

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 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
Long lasting insecticidal net use and its associated factors in Limmu Seka District, South West Ethiopia
Published in
BMC Public Health, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5022-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mitiku Teshome Hambisa, Tessema Debela, Yadeta Dessie, Tesfaye Gobena

Abstract

Many countries in sub-Saharan Africa, including Ethiopia, are focusing on the distribution of Long Lasting Insecticidal Nets (LLINs) to combat malaria. However, utilization of the LLIN is low when compared with LLIN possession because of various factors. This study was conducted to measure the actual LLIN usage and identify factors associated with its utilization in Limmu Seka District, South West Ethiopia. A community based cross-sectional survey was conducted among 830 households from December 25, 2011 to February 29, 2012. A total of 830 households were selected by stratified systematic sampling and surveyed. Ninety percent of those surveyed owned LLINs and 68.3% reported that someone had slept under the net on the night prior to the survey. The factors associated with LLIN usage were knowledge of the mode of malaria transmission (AOR; 0.086, 95% CI 0.03, 0.24), the preferred conical shapes of the LLIN (AOR; 1.6, 95% CI 1.31, 4.1), receiving information about their use from Health Extension Workers (HEWs) (AOR; 2.4, 95% CI 1.5, 3.9), hearing media campaigns (AOR; 3.2 95% CI 3.5, 9.2), education at a health facility (AOR; 2 95% CI 1.5, 3.9) or having a family size of three or less (AOR; 2.1, 95% CI 1.3, 3.5). Although ownership of Long Lasting Insecticidal Nets was high at 90%, the actual usage of LLIN was low, and not all family members were protected. Promoting the usage of LLINs utilization by those at most risk, especially the conical shaped ones, through intensified health education using HEWs and mass media campaigns at all health facilities, schools and communities will improve LLIN utilization.

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 > Master 17 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Researcher 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Student > Postgraduate 3 4%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 26 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 13 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Unspecified 2 3%
Environmental Science 2 3%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 30 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 10 January 2018.
All research outputs
#5,807,468
of 23,015,156 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#5,796
of 14,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,994
of 443,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#133
of 226 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,015,156 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,994 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 443,280 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 226 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.