↓ Skip to main content

Do holes in long-lasting insecticidal nets compromise their efficacy against pyrethroid resistant Anopheles gambiae and Culex quinquefasciatus? Results from a release–recapture study in experimental…

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
136 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
Do holes in long-lasting insecticidal nets compromise their efficacy against pyrethroid resistant Anopheles gambiae and Culex quinquefasciatus? Results from a release–recapture study in experimental huts
Published in
Malaria Journal, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12936-015-0836-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sanjiarizaha Randriamaherijaona, Olivier J T Briët, Sébastien Boyer, Aziz Bouraima, Raphael N’Guessan, Christophe Rogier, Vincent Corbel

Abstract

Resistance of malaria vectors to pyrethroids threatens the effectiveness of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) as a tool for malaria control. Recent experimental hut and observational studies in Benin show that pyrethroid resistance reduces the insecticidal effect and personal protection of LLINs especially when they become torn. The World Health Organization has proposed a threshold for when nets are "too torn" at 1,000 cm(2) for rectangular holes and 790 cm(2) for round holes. This study examines whether there is a threshold above which LLINs no longer reduce malaria transmission. Intact and artificially-holed LLINs under three months old and untreated nets were tested by releasing mosquitoes from a susceptible Anopheles gambiae colony, a pyrethroid-resistant An. gambiae population and a resistant Culex quinquefasciatus population in closed experimental huts in Southern Benin, West Africa. The efficacy of LLINs and untreated nets was evaluated in terms of protection against blood feeding, insecticidal effect and potential effect on malaria transmission. Personal protection by both LLINs and untreated nets decreased exponentially with increasing holed surface area, without evidence for a specific threshold beyond which LLINs could be considered as ineffective. The insecticidal effect of LLINs was lower in resistant mosquitoes than in susceptible mosquitoes, but holed surface area had little or no impact on the insecticidal effect of LLINs. LLINs with 22,500 cm(2) holed surface area and target insecticide content provided a personal protection of 0.60 (95 % CI 0.44-0.73) and a low insecticidal effect of 0.20 (95 % CI 0.12-0.30) against resistant An. gambiae. Nevertheless, mathematical models suggested that if 80 % of the population uses such nets, they could still prevent 94 % (95 % CI 89-97 %) of transmission by pyrethroid-resistant An. gambiae. Even though personal protection by LLINs against feeding mosquitoes is strongly reduced by holes, the insecticidal effect of LLINs is independent of the holed surface area, but strongly dependent on insecticide resistance. Badly torn nets that still contain insecticide have potential to reduce malaria transmission. The relationship between LLIN integrity and efficacy needs to be understood in order to guide LLIN distribution policy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Sudan 1 <1%
Malawi 1 <1%
Unknown 132 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 27 20%
Student > Master 24 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Student > Postgraduate 7 5%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 30 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 32 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 9%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Environmental Science 6 4%
Other 21 15%
Unknown 35 26%
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 06 September 2015.
All research outputs
#5,927,058
of 24,400,706 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,424
of 5,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,491
of 272,880 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#21
of 136 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,400,706 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 272,880 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 136 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.