↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of insecticidal nets on uncomplicated clinical malaria: a case–control study for operational evaluation

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 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 insecticidal nets on uncomplicated clinical malaria: a case–control study for operational evaluation
Published in
Malaria Journal, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1156-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Georgia Barikissou Damien, Armel Djènontin, Evelyne Chaffa, Sandra Yamadjako, Papa Makhtar Drame, Emmanuel Elanga Ndille, Marie-Claire Henry, Vincent Corbel, Franck Remoué, Christophe Rogier

Abstract

In a context of large-scale implementation of malaria vector control tools, such as the distribution of long-lasting insecticide nets (LLIN), it is necessary to regularly assess whether strategies are progressing as expected and then evaluate their effectiveness. The present study used the case-control approach to evaluate the effectiveness of LLIN 42 months after national wide distribution. This study design offers an alternative to cohort study and randomized control trial as it permits to avoid many ethical issues inherent to them. From April to August 2011, a case-control study was conducted in two health districts in Benin; Ouidah-Kpomasse-Tori (OKT) in the south and Djougou-Copargo-Ouake (DCO) in the north. Children aged 0-60 months randomly selected from community were included. Cases were children with a high axillary temperature (≥37.5 °C) or a reported history of fever during the last 48 h with a positive rapid diagnostic test (RDT). Controls were children with neither fever nor signs suggesting malaria with a negative RDT. The necessary sample size was at least 396 cases and 1188 controls from each site. The main exposure variable was "sleeping every night under an LLIN for the 2 weeks before the survey" (SL). The protective effectiveness (PE) of LLIN was calculated as PE = 1 - odds ratio. The declared SL range was low, with 17.0 and 27.5 % in cases and controls in the OKT area, and 44.9 and 56.5 % in cases and controls, in the DCO area, respectively. The declared SL conferred 40.5 % (95 % CI 22.2-54.5 %) and 55.5 % (95 % CI 28.2-72.4 %) protection against uncomplicated malaria in the OKT and the DCO areas, respectively. Significant differences in PE were observed according to the mother's education level. In the context of a mass distribution of LLIN, their use still conferred protection in up to 55 % against the occurrence of clinical malaria cases in children. Social factors, the poor use and the poor condition of an LLIN can be in disfavour with its effectiveness. In areas, where LLIN coverage is assumed to be universal or targeted at high-risk populations, case-control studies should be regularly conducted to monitor the effectiveness of LLIN. The findings will help National Malaria Control Programme and their partners to improve the quality of malaria control according to the particularity of each area or region as far as possible.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 99 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%
Ghana 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 95 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 24%
Researcher 14 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 24 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 13%
Social Sciences 9 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 6%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 26 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 23 February 2016.
All research outputs
#14,249,851
of 22,849,304 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#3,969
of 5,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,381
of 297,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#112
of 180 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,849,304 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 297,895 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 180 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.