↓ Skip to main content

Assessing the availability of LLINs for continuous distribution through routine antenatal care and the Expanded Programme on Immunizations in sub-Saharan Africa

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
116 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
Assessing the availability of LLINs for continuous distribution through routine antenatal care and the Expanded Programme on Immunizations in sub-Saharan Africa
Published in
Malaria Journal, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1309-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katherine Theiss-Nyland, Michael Lynch, Jo Lines

Abstract

In addition to mass distribution campaigns, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends the continuous distribution of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) to all pregnant women attending antenatal care (ANC) and all infants attending the Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) services in countries implementing mosquito nets for malaria control. Countries report LLIN distribution data to the WHO annually. For this analysis, these data were used to assess policy and practice in implementing these recommendations and to compare the numbers of LLINs available through ANC and EPI services with the numbers of women and children attending these services. For each reporting country in sub-Saharan Africa, the presence of a reported policy for LLIN distribution through ANC and EPI was reviewed. Prior to inclusion in the analysis the completeness of data was assessed in terms of the numbers of LLINs distributed through all channels (campaigns, EPI, ANC, other). For each country with adequate data, the numbers of LLINs reportedly distributed by national programmes to ANC was compared to the number of women reportedly attending ANC at least once; the ratio between these two numbers was used as an indicator of LLIN availability at ANC services. The same calculations were repeated for LLINs distributed through EPI to produce the corresponding LLIN availability through this distribution channel. Among 48 malaria-endemic countries in Africa, 33 malaria programmes reported adopting policies of ANC-based continuous distribution of LLINs, and 25 reported adopting policies of EPI-based distribution. Over a 3-year period through 2012, distribution through ANC accounted for 9 % of LLINs distributed, and LLINs distributed through EPI accounted for 4 %. The LLIN availability ratios achieved were 55 % through ANC and 34 % through EPI. For 38 country programmes reporting on LLIN distribution, data to calculate LLIN availability through ANC and EPI was available for 17 and 16, respectively. These continuous LLIN distribution channels appear to be under-utilized, especially EPI-based distribution. However, quality data from more countries are needed for consistent and reliable programme performance monitoring. A greater focus on routine data collection, monitoring and reporting on LLINs distributed through both ANC and EPI can provide insight into both strengths and weaknesses of continuous distribution, and improve the effectiveness of these delivery channels.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Madagascar 1 <1%
Unknown 115 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 22%
Researcher 19 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Lecturer 6 5%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 29 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 16%
Social Sciences 9 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Other 24 21%
Unknown 28 24%
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 13 December 2016.
All research outputs
#7,163,320
of 25,318,210 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,864
of 5,899 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,254
of 305,401 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#39
of 150 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,318,210 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,899 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 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 305,401 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 150 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 74% of its contemporaries.