↓ Skip to main content

The use of mosquito repellents at three sites in India with declining malaria transmission: surveys in the community and clinic

Overview of attention for article published in Parasites & Vectors, July 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
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
Title
The use of mosquito repellents at three sites in India with declining malaria transmission: surveys in the community and clinic
Published in
Parasites & Vectors, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13071-016-1709-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna Maria van Eijk, Lalitha Ramanathapuram, Patrick L. Sutton, Nandini Peddy, Sandhya Choubey, Stuti Mohanty, Aswin Asokan, Sangamithra Ravishankaran, G Sri Lakshmi Priya, Justin Amala Johnson, Sangeetha Velayutham, Deena Kanagaraj, Ankita Patel, Nisha Desai, Nikunj Tandel, Steven A. Sullivan, Samuel C. Wassmer, Ranveer Singh, K Pradhan, Jane M. Carlton, H. C. Srivasatava, Alex Eapen, S. K. Sharma

Abstract

Repellents such as coils, vaporizers, mats and creams can be used to reduce the risk of malaria and other infectious diseases. Although evidence for their effectiveness is limited, they are advertised as providing an additional approach to mosquito control in combination with other strategies, e.g. insecticide-treated nets. We examined the use of repellents in India in an urban setting in Chennai (mainly Plasmodium vivax malaria), a peri-urban setting in Nadiad (both P. vivax and P. falciparum malaria), and a more rural setting in Raurkela (mainly P. falciparum malaria). The use of repellents was examined at the household level during a census, and at the individual level in cross-sectional surveys and among patients visiting a clinic with fever or other symptoms. Factors associated with their use were examined in a multivariate analysis, and the association between malaria and the use of repellents was assessed among survey- and clinic participants. Characteristics of participants differed by region, with more people of higher education present in Chennai. Use of repellents varied between 56-77 % at the household level and between 32-78 % at the individual level. Vaporizers were the main repellents used in Chennai, whereas coils were more common in Nadiad and Raurkela. In Chennai and Nadiad, vaporizers were more likely to be used in households with young male children. Vaporizer use was associated with higher socio-economic status (SES) in households in Chennai and Nadiad, whereas use of coils was greater in the lower SES strata. In Raurkela, there was a higher use of coils among the higher SES strata. Education was associated with the use of a repellent among survey participants in Chennai and clinic study participants in Chennai and Nadiad. Repellent use was associated with less malaria in the clinic study in Chennai and Raurkela, but not in the surveys, with the exception of the use of coils in Nadiad. Repellents are widely used in India. Their use is influenced by the level of education and SES. Information on effectiveness and guidance on choices may improve rational use.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 115 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 15%
Student > Master 17 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 12%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Lecturer 7 6%
Other 20 17%
Unknown 28 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Environmental Science 7 6%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Other 23 20%
Unknown 34 30%
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 24 August 2016.
All research outputs
#13,476,177
of 22,881,964 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#2,459
of 5,475 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,679
of 365,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#69
of 145 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,964 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,475 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 365,596 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 145 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.