↓ Skip to main content

Application of mosquito repellent coils and associated self-reported health issues in Ghana

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
135 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
Application of mosquito repellent coils and associated self-reported health issues in Ghana
Published in
Malaria Journal, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1126-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jonathan N. Hogarh, Philip Antwi-Agyei, Kwasi Obiri-Danso

Abstract

The use of mosquito coils has gained widespread patronage in malaria-endemic countries, even though it is not a recommended preventive measure for avoiding mosquitoes. Mosquito coils contain insecticides, which are expected to vaporize slowly once the coil is lit, to provide protection against the mosquito. The mosquito coil base material contains a variety of compounds capable of burning slowly to gradually release the insecticide. The mosquito coil smoke, however, is potentially a source of indoor air pollution with implications for acute respiratory infections (ARI) and other illnesses. The present study investigated the application of mosquito coils and associated self-reported health issues in Ghana. A cross-sectional study was undertaken in which questionnaires were randomly administered to 480 households across four districts in Ghana. Respondents who exclusively applied mosquito coils were grouped as test cohort, while those who did not apply any mosquito repellency method constituted a control cohort. The test group that applied mosquito coils reported malaria incidence rate of 86.3 %. The control group that did not apply any mosquito repellency method reported an incidence rate of malaria at 72.4 %. Chi square analysis suggested that the observed difference was statistically significant (x (2)  = 4.25; p = 0.04). The number of respondents who reported symptoms of cough from mosquito coil application (52.6 % incidence rate) was marginally greater than their counterparts who did not apply coils (46.1 % incidence rate). It was also found that respondents with shortage of breath, which was used as a proxy for ARI, were more likely to have applied mosquito coil. The application of mosquito coils did not necessarily reduce the incidence of malaria in the study communities. It however presented a potential respiratory risk factor, which should be further investigated by critically examining exposure to particulate matter emissions from burning coils.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 135 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 16%
Student > Bachelor 18 13%
Researcher 12 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 7%
Student > Postgraduate 6 4%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 49 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 4%
Environmental Science 5 4%
Other 24 18%
Unknown 56 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 28 June 2017.
All research outputs
#6,295,110
of 22,844,985 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,775
of 5,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,608
of 397,006 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#49
of 194 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,844,985 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,573 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 397,006 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 194 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.