↓ Skip to main content

A qualitative study of community perception and acceptance of biological larviciding for malaria mosquito control in rural Burkina Faso

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
Title
A qualitative study of community perception and acceptance of biological larviciding for malaria mosquito control in rural Burkina Faso
Published in
BMC Public Health, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5299-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Dambach, Margarida Mendes Jorge, Issouf Traoré, Revati Phalkey, Hélène Sawadogo, Pascal Zabré, Moubassira Kagoné, Ali Sié, Rainer Sauerborn, Norbert Becker, Claudia Beiersmann

Abstract

Vector and malaria parasite's rising resistance against pyrethroid-impregnated bed nets and antimalarial drugs highlight the need for additional control measures. Larviciding against malaria vectors is experiencing a renaissance with the availability of environmentally friendly and target species-specific larvicides. In this study, we analyse the perception and acceptability of spraying surface water collections with the biological larvicide Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis in a single health district in Burkina Faso. A total of 12 focus group discussions and 12 key informant interviews were performed in 10 rural villages provided with coverage of various larvicide treatments (all breeding sites treated, the most productive breeding sites treated, and untreated control). Respondents' knowledge about the major risk factors for malaria transmission was generally good. Most interviewees stated they performed personal protective measures against vector mosquitoes including the use of bed nets and sometimes mosquito coils and traditional repellents. The acceptance of larviciding in and around the villages was high and the majority of respondents reported a relief in mosquito nuisance and malarial episodes. There was high interest in the project and demand for future continuation. This study showed that larviciding interventions received positive resonance from the population. People showed a willingness to be involved and financially support the program. The positive environment with high acceptance for larviciding programs would facilitate routine implementation. An essential factor for the future success of such programs would be inclusion in regional or national malaria control guidelines.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 89 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 16%
Student > Master 13 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 29 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 7%
Social Sciences 6 7%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 33 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 03 January 2019.
All research outputs
#21,868,379
of 24,400,706 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#15,094
of 16,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#296,452
of 335,200 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#307
of 316 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,400,706 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,125 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 335,200 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 316 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.