↓ Skip to main content

Durability of Olyset campaign nets distributed between 2009 and 2011 in eight districts of Tanzania

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 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
Durability of Olyset campaign nets distributed between 2009 and 2011 in eight districts of Tanzania
Published in
Malaria Journal, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1225-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dennis J. Massue, Sarah J. Moore, Zawadi D. Mageni, Jason D. Moore, John Bradley, Olivier Pigeon, Erasto J. Maziba, Renata Mandike, Karen Kramer, William N. Kisinza, Hans J. Overgaard, Lena M. Lorenz

Abstract

Long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) are the first line choice for malaria vector control in sub-Saharan Africa, with most countries adopting universal coverage campaigns. However, there is only limited information on LLIN durability under user conditions. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the durability of Olyset(®) LLINs distributed during campaigns between 2009 and 2011 in Tanzania. A retrospective field survey was conducted in eight districts in Tanzania mainland to assess the durability of Olyset campaign nets. Household questionnaires were used to assess attrition, i.e. net loss. All nets remaining in households were collected. A sub-sample of 198 Olyset campaign nets was examined for bio-efficacy against Anopheles gambiae s.s. mosquitoes, permethrin content and physical integrity following standard World Health Organization (WHO) methods. Of 6067 campaign nets reported to have been received between 2009 and 2011, 35 % (2145 nets) were no longer present. Most of those nets had been discarded (84 %) mainly because they were too torn (94 %). Of the 198 sub-sampled Olyset LLINs, 61 % were still in serviceable physical condition sufficient to provide personal protection while 39 % were in unserviceable physical condition according to WHO proportionate Hole Index (pHI). More than 96 % (116/120) of nets in serviceable condition passed WHO bioefficacy criteria while all nets in unserviceable condition passed WHO bioefficacy criteria. Overall mean permethrin content was 16.5 g/kg (95 % CI 16.2-16.9) with 78 % of the sub-sampled nets retaining recommended permethrin content regardless of their age or physical condition. Nets aged 4 years and above had a mean permethrin content of 14 g/kg (95 % CI 12.0-16.0). The only statistically significant predictor of reduced physical net integrity was rats in the house. Two-to-four years after a mass campaign, only 39 % of distributed nets remain both present and in serviceable physical condition, a functional survival considerably below WHO assumptions of 50 % survival of a 'three-year' net. However, the majority of nets still retained substantial levels of permethrin and could still be bio-chemically useful against mosquitoes if their holes were repaired, adding evidence to the value of net care and repair campaigns.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sudan 1 1%
Unknown 97 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 27%
Student > Master 15 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Lecturer 4 4%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 23 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 12%
Environmental Science 7 7%
Social Sciences 6 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Other 22 22%
Unknown 28 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 March 2016.
All research outputs
#12,950,089
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#3,172
of 5,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,258
of 300,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#94
of 194 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 300,781 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 53% 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 is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.