↓ Skip to main content

Bed nets used to protect against malaria do not last long in a semi-arid area of Ethiopia: a cohort study

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
Bed nets used to protect against malaria do not last long in a semi-arid area of Ethiopia: a cohort study
Published in
Malaria Journal, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12936-018-2391-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tarekegn Solomon, Eskindir Loha, Wakgari Deressa, Meshesha Balkew, Taye Gari, Hans J. Overgaard, Bernt Lindtjørn

Abstract

Long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) are a key tool for malaria prevention and control. Currently, the recommended serviceable life of an LLIN is 3 years under field conditions. However, field studies show considerable variation in LLIN lifespan, from less than 2 years to more than 4 years. This study aimed to determine the attrition, physical integrity, functional survival, and bio-efficacy of LLINs under field conditions in south-central Ethiopia. In October 2014, 7740 LLINs (PermaNet® 2.0) were distributed to 3006 households. Among the distributed LLINs, a cohort study involving 1532 LLINs in 659 households was carried out from October 2014 to November 2016. Data were collected every 6 months by observation, and through interviews with the heads of households. The proportional hole index was used to categorize LLINs as either serviceable or torn. In addition, 120 randomly selected LLINs were tested for bio-efficacy. The overall attrition of LLINs was 96% (n = 993) during the study period. The nets' attrition was mainly due to disposal (64.2%; n = 638). The proportion of LLINs with a hole size 0.5 cm or larger was 79.5% after 24 months. The use of the net on the previous night and having a clean net were associated with a good physical integrity. However, living in a household more than 1 km away from the mosquitoes' breeding site was associated with poor physical integrity. By the 24th month, only 4% of the nets met the criteria for functional survival. The median functional survival time of the nets was 12 months. A longer functional survival was associated with having a clean net, and shorter survival was associated with living in a household more than 1 km away from the mosquitoes' breeding site. The PermaNet® 2.0 met the criteria of effective bio-efficacy up to month 24 after distribution. The study showed that the median serviceable life of LLINs is only 12 months. However, the bio-efficacy of the LLINs is acceptable for at least 24 months. Therefore, stronger and more efficient LLINs need to be developed for conditions similar to those studied here.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 23%
Student > Master 8 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 21 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 8 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 9%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 24 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 27 June 2018.
All research outputs
#13,071,205
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#2,963
of 5,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,338
of 329,152 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#54
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,653 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 329,152 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.