↓ Skip to main content

Community participation in mosquito breeding site control: an interdisciplinary mixed methods study in Curaçao

Overview of attention for article published in Parasites & Vectors, September 2017
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
198 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
Community participation in mosquito breeding site control: an interdisciplinary mixed methods study in Curaçao
Published in
Parasites & Vectors, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13071-017-2371-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jelte Elsinga, Henry T. van der Veen, Izzy Gerstenbluth, Johannes G. M. Burgerhof, Arie Dijkstra, Martin P. Grobusch, Adriana Tami, Ajay Bailey

Abstract

As the arboviral diseases dengue, chikungunya and Zika emerge in the Americas, so does the need for sustainable vector control policies. To successfully achieve mosquito control, joint efforts of both communities and governments are essential. This study investigates this important, but by-and-large neglected topic. In June and July 2015, a cross-sectional mixed methods study applying a survey questionnaire (response rate of 82.5%; n = 339), in-depth interviews (n = 20) and focus group discussions (n = 7; 50 participants) was performed in Curaçao. The study was designed based on an integrated theoretical framework of the Health Belief Model and the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Participants showed a good knowledge of, and a high-level performance of mosquito breeding site control (MBSC) practices. Personal protection against mosquitoes (e.g. topical repellents) was perceived as relatively less effective thus practiced to lower extent compared to MBSC practices (i.e. larval source management). A lower intention to perform MBSC was independently associated with: (i) satisfaction on governmental MBSC (P = 0.012); (ii) barriers to perform MBSC practices, i.e. 'Government doesn't control other breeding sites' (P = 0.005), 'Don't know how to control breeding sites' (P = 0.041), and 'a mosquito does not transmit dengue' (P = 0.016), (iii) attitudes towards MBSC (P = 0.001) and self-efficacy (person's perceived ability to act) to perform MBSC (P = 0.002). Mixed-methods evidence highlights three possible ways of improving community participation in MBSC. First, it highlights the need for ongoing media coverage, targeting (i) communities' perceptions on transmission routes of dengue and chikungunya, and (ii) presence of car tires in yards. Secondly, it shows that promotion of governmental activities in MBSC can enhance MBSC of communities, if people develop a sense of responsibility to perform MBSC at their own properties. Thirdly, this study describes the presence of key persons in communities, who could be engaged in mosquito control policies to improve MBSC in neighbourhoods. This study reveals gaps between policy and communities' lived realities. These gaps might be overcome with the proposed interventions, resulting in a higher performance of MBSC in the community in Curaçao. Furthermore, this study shows how interdisciplinary mixed methods research can provide important, comprehensive, and in-depth insights to inform mosquito control policies.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 198 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 16%
Student > Bachelor 21 11%
Researcher 19 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 7%
Lecturer 11 6%
Other 36 18%
Unknown 67 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 10%
Social Sciences 12 6%
Environmental Science 12 6%
Other 36 18%
Unknown 73 37%
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 16 May 2018.
All research outputs
#14,364,802
of 23,002,898 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#2,843
of 5,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,811
of 318,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#58
of 123 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,002,898 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,498 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 318,242 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 123 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.