↓ Skip to main content

Does livestock protect from malaria or facilitate malaria prevalence? A cross-sectional study in endemic rural areas of Indonesia

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
197 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
Does livestock protect from malaria or facilitate malaria prevalence? A cross-sectional study in endemic rural areas of Indonesia
Published in
Malaria Journal, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12936-018-2447-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hamzah Hasyim, Meghnath Dhimal, Jan Bauer, Doreen Montag, David A. Groneberg, Ulrich Kuch, Ruth Müller

Abstract

Ever since it was discovered that zoophilic vectors can transmit malaria, zooprophylaxis has been used to prevent the disease. However, zoopotentiation has also been observed. Thus, the presence of livestock has been widely accepted as an important variable for the prevalence and risk of malaria, but the effectiveness of zooprophylaxis remained subject to debate. This study aims to critically analyse the effects of the presence of livestock on malaria prevalence using a large dataset from Indonesia. This study is based on data from the Indonesia Basic Health Research ("Riskesdas") cross-sectional survey of 2007 organized by the National Institute of Health Research and Development of Indonesia's Ministry of Health. The subset of data used in the present study included 259,885 research participants who reside in the rural areas of 176 regencies throughout the 15 provinces of Indonesia where the prevalence of malaria is higher than the national average. The variable "existence of livestock" and other independent demographic, social and behavioural variables were tested as potential determinants for malaria prevalence by multivariate logistic regressions. Raising medium-sized animals in the house was a significant predictor of malaria prevalence (OR = 2.980; 95% CI 2.348-3.782, P < 0.001) when compared to keeping such animals outside of the house (OR = 1.713; 95% CI 1.515-1.937, P < 0.001). After adjusting for gender, age, access to community health facility, sewage canal condition, use of mosquito nets and insecticide-treated bed nets, the participants who raised medium-sized animals inside their homes were 2.8 times more likely to contract malaria than respondents who did not (adjusted odds ratio = 2.809; 95% CI 2.207-3.575; P < 0.001). The results of this study highlight the importance of livestock for malaria transmission, suggesting that keeping livestock in the house contributes to malaria risk rather than prophylaxis in Indonesia. Livestock-based interventions should therefore play a significant role in the implementation of malaria control programmes, and focus on households with a high proportion of medium-sized animals in rural areas. The implementation of a "One Health" strategy to eliminate malaria in Indonesia by 2030 is strongly recommended.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 197 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 14%
Student > Master 23 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 7%
Student > Bachelor 14 7%
Lecturer 12 6%
Other 29 15%
Unknown 77 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 8%
Environmental Science 15 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 7%
Social Sciences 10 5%
Other 37 19%
Unknown 86 44%
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 22 August 2019.
All research outputs
#16,122,040
of 23,923,788 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#4,601
of 5,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#214,919
of 336,324 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#89
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,923,788 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,720 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. 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 336,324 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.