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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Perceptions on the effect of small electric fans on comfort inside bed nets in southern Ghana: a qualitative study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Malaria Journal, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12936-016-1614-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mulako S. Jaeger, Olivier J. T. Briët, Joseph Keating, Collins K. Ahorlu, Joshua O. Yukich, Samuel Oppong, Peter Nardini, Constanze Pfeiffer |
| Abstract |
Long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) are known to be highly effective in reducing malaria transmission, morbidity and mortality. However, among those owning an LLIN, use rates are often suboptimal. A reported barrier to bed net use is discomfort due to heat. This qualitative study was part of a larger evaluation conducted in communities without electricity in rural Ghana to assess whether 0.8 W solar powered net fans can increase net use. Twenty-three key informant interviews with household heads in the study communities in Shai-Osudoku District, southern Ghana, were conducted from July to August 2015. The purpose of the interviews was to obtain insight into perceptions of participants about the net fan system in relation to LLIN use. While all study participants reported using LLINs, with mosquito nuisance prevention as the prime motivation, heat was also mentioned as a key barrier to net use. Respondents appreciated the net fans because they improved comfort inside bed nets. The LED light on the fan stand became the main source of light at night and positively influenced the perception of the intervention as a whole. The general acceptance of the net fan system by the study participants highlights the potential of the intervention to improve comfort inside mosquito nets. This, therefore, has a potential to increase bed net use in areas with low access to electricity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 50% |
| Germany | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 61 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 26% |
| Researcher | 10 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 16 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 23% |
| Unknown | 19 | 31% |
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 11 May 2017.
All research outputs
#15,866,607
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#4,537
of 5,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,733
of 419,971 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#65
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,653 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 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 419,971 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.