↓ Skip to main content

Sustainable, healthy cities: protocol of a mixed methods evaluation of a cluster randomized controlled trial for Aedes control in Brazil using a community mobilization approach

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, February 2020
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 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
Sustainable, healthy cities: protocol of a mixed methods evaluation of a cluster randomized controlled trial for Aedes control in Brazil using a community mobilization approach
Published in
Trials, February 2020
DOI 10.1186/s13063-019-3714-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kate Zinszer, Andrea Caprara, Antonio Lima, Stéphanie Degroote, Monica Zahreddine, Kellyanne Abreu, Mabel Carabali, Katia Charland, Mayana Azevedo Dantas, José Wellington, Beatriz Parra, Florence Fournet, Emmanuel Bonnet, Denis Pérez, Emilie Robert, Christian Dagenais, Tarik Benmarhnia, Neil Andersson, Valéry Ridde

Abstract

Dengue is increasing in its global presence with an estimated 4 billion people at-risk of infection in at least 128 countries. Despite the promising results of EcoHealth and community mobilization approaches to Aedes reduction, more evidence of their efficacy on reducing dengue risk is needed. The principal research question is to determine if interventions based upon community mobilization reduce the risk of dengue virus infection among children 3 to 9 years old compared to usual dengue control practice in Fortaleza, Brazil. The present study will follow a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) design with randomization at the census tract level with equal allocation to the two arms. In each arm, there will be 34 clusters of 86 children between 3 to 9 years old for an expected total of 5848 children enrolled in the study, assuming a risk reduction of 29.5% based upon findings from a previous multi-site cRCT. The primary outcomes are rates of anti-dengue Immunoglobulin G (IgG) seroconversion and adult female Aedes density. The intervention is based upon a participatory health research approach, Socializing Evidence for Participatory Action (SEPA), where the research evidence is used to foster community engagement and ownership of the health issue and solution. Following allocation, intervention communities will develop and implement their own solutions that will likely include a wide variety of collective events and media approaches. Data collection activities over a period of 3 years include household visits for blood collection, household surveys, and entomological surveys; and qualitative activities including focus groups, in-depth interviews, and document analysis to evaluate the process, acceptability, fidelity, and sustainability of the intervention. Study participants will be aware of their assignment and all research staff will be blinded although the intervention assignment will likely be revealed to field staff through interaction with participants. The results of our study will provide evidence on community mobilization as an intervention for dengue control. We anticipate that if community mobilization is effective in Fortaleza, the results of this study will help develop evidence-based vector control programs in Brazil, and also in other countries struggling with Aedes-transmitted diseases. ISRCTN66131315, registration date: 1 October 2018.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 113 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 11%
Researcher 10 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 51 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 4%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 54 48%