↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of malaria control interventions in Madagascar: a nationwide case–control survey

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 (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
122 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
Effectiveness of malaria control interventions in Madagascar: a nationwide case–control survey
Published in
Malaria Journal, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1132-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Kesteman, Milijaona Randrianarivelojosia, Vaomalala Raharimanga, Laurence Randrianasolo, Patrice Piola, Christophe Rogier

Abstract

Madagascar, as other malaria endemic countries, depends mainly on international funding for the implementation of malaria control interventions (MCI). As these funds no longer increase, policy makers need to know whether these MCI actually provide the expected protection. This study aimed at measuring the effectiveness of MCI deployed in all transmission patterns of Madagascar in 2012-2013 against the occurrence of clinical malaria cases. From September 2012 to August 2013, patients consulting for non-complicated malaria in 31 sentinel health centres (SHC) were asked to answer a short questionnaire about long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLIN) use, indoor residual spraying (IRS) in the household and intermittent preventive treatment of pregnant women (IPTp) intake. Controls were healthy all-ages individuals sampled from a concurrent cross-sectional survey conducted in areas surrounding the SHC. Cases and controls were retained in the database if they were resident of the same communes. The association between Plasmodium infection and exposure to MCI was calculated by multivariate multilevel models, and the protective effectiveness (PE) of an intervention was defined as 1 minus the odds ratio of this association. Data about 841 cases (out of 6760 cases observed in SHC) and 8284 controls was collected. The regular use of LLIN provided a significant 51 % PE (95 % CI [16-71]) in multivariate analysis, excluding in one transmission pattern where PE was -11 % (95 % CI [-251 to 65]) in univariate analysis. The PE of IRS was 51 % (95 % CI [31-65]), and the PE of exposure to both regular use of LLIN and IRS was 72 % (95 % CI [28-89]) in multivariate analyses. Vector control interventions avoided yearly over 100,000 clinical cases of malaria in Madagascar. The maternal PE of IPTp was 73 %. In Madagascar, LLIN and IRS had good PE against clinical malaria. These results may apply to other countries with similar transmission profiles, but such case-control surveys could be recommended to identify local failures in the effectiveness of MCI.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Madagascar 1 <1%
Unknown 121 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 25%
Researcher 23 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Other 21 17%
Unknown 22 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 10%
Social Sciences 10 8%
Environmental Science 7 6%
Other 28 23%
Unknown 27 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 16 February 2016.
All research outputs
#7,813,717
of 23,863,389 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#2,462
of 5,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,970
of 405,527 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#75
of 183 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,863,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,718 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 405,527 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 183 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 59% of its contemporaries.