↓ Skip to main content

A qualitative study on health workers’ and community members’ perceived sources, role of information and communication on malaria treatment, prevention and control in southeast Nigeria

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, October 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 (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
128 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
A qualitative study on health workers’ and community members’ perceived sources, role of information and communication on malaria treatment, prevention and control in southeast Nigeria
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12879-015-1187-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jane C Umeano-Enemuoh, Benjamim Uzochukwu, Nkoli Ezumah, Lindsay Mangham-Jefferies, Virginia Wiseman, Obinna Onwujekwe

Abstract

It has been widely acknowledged that well-planned and executed communication programmes can contribute to achieving malaria prevention and treatment goals. This however requires a good understanding of current sources and roles of information used by both health workers and communities. The study aimed at determining health workers' and community members' sources, value and use of information on malaria prevention and treatment in Nigeria. Qualitative data was collected from six selected communities (three urban and three rural) in Enugu state, southeast Nigeria. A total of 18 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with 179 community members and 26 in-depth interviews (IDIs) with health workers in public and private health facilities were used to collect data on where people receive treatment for malaria and access information on malaria. The FGDS and IDIs also provided data on the values, uses and effects of information and communication on malaria treatment seeking and provision of services. The findings revealed that the major sources of information on malaria for health workers and community members were advertisements in the mass media, workshops and seminars organized by donor agencies, facility supervision, posters, other health workers, television and radio adverts. Community involvement in the design and delivery of information on malaria control was seen as a strong strategy for improving both consumer and provider knowledge. Information from the different sources catalyzed appropriate provision and consumption of malaria treatment amongst health workers and community members. Health workers and consumers receive information on malaria prevention and treatment from multiple sources of communication and information, which they find useful. Harnessing these information sources to encourage consistent and accurate messages around malaria prevention and treatment is a necessary first step in the design and implementation of malaria communication and behaviour change interventions and ultimately for the sustained control of malaria.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Bangladesh 3 2%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Malawi 1 <1%
Unknown 123 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 19%
Researcher 20 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 9%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Lecturer 10 8%
Other 24 19%
Unknown 29 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 23%
Social Sciences 17 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 4%
Other 18 14%
Unknown 36 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 04 December 2015.
All research outputs
#4,663,811
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1,523
of 7,678 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,981
of 283,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#40
of 162 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,678 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 283,279 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 162 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.