↓ Skip to main content

Accuracy and impact of spatial aids based upon satellite enumeration to improve indoor residual spraying spatial coverage

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Accuracy and impact of spatial aids based upon satellite enumeration to improve indoor residual spraying spatial coverage
Published in
Malaria Journal, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12936-018-2236-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel J. Bridges, Derek Pollard, Anna M. Winters, Benjamin Winters, Chadwick Sikaala, Silvia Renn, David A. Larsen

Abstract

Indoor residual spraying (IRS) is a key tool in the fight to control, eliminate and ultimately eradicate malaria. IRS protection is based on a communal effect such that an individual's protection primarily relies on the community-level coverage of IRS with limited protection being provided by household-level coverage. To ensure a communal effect is achieved through IRS, achieving high and uniform community-level coverage should be the ultimate priority of an IRS campaign. Ensuring high community-level coverage of IRS in malaria-endemic areas is challenging given the lack of information available about both the location and number of households needing IRS in any given area. A process termed 'mSpray' has been developed and implemented and involves use of satellite imagery for enumeration for planning IRS and a mobile application to guide IRS implementation. This study assessed (1) the accuracy of the satellite enumeration and (2) how various degrees of spatial aid provided through the mSpray process affected community-level IRS coverage during the 2015 spray campaign in Zambia. A 2-stage sampling process was applied to assess accuracy of satellite enumeration to determine number and location of sprayable structures. Results indicated an overall sensitivity of 94% for satellite enumeration compared to finding structures on the ground. After adjusting for structure size, roof, and wall type, households in Nchelenge District where all types of satellite-based spatial aids (paper-based maps plus use of the mobile mSpray application) were used were more likely to have received IRS than Kasama district where maps used were not based on satellite enumeration. The probability of a household being sprayed in Nchelenge district where tablet-based maps were used, did not differ statistically from that of a household in Samfya District, where detailed paper-based spatial aids based on satellite enumeration were provided. IRS coverage from the 2015 spray season benefited from the use of spatial aids based upon satellite enumeration. These spatial aids can guide costly IRS planning and implementation leading to attainment of higher spatial coverage, and likely improve disease impact.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 17%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Student > Postgraduate 3 5%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 23 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Unspecified 2 3%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 29 49%
Attention Score in Context

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 February 2018.
All research outputs
#16,584,918
of 24,400,706 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#4,704
of 5,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,646
of 334,318 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#115
of 140 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,400,706 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,827 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 334,318 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 140 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.