↓ Skip to main content

What happens to lost nets: a multi-country analysis of reasons for LLIN attrition using 14 household surveys in four countries

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
9 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
52 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
What happens to lost nets: a multi-country analysis of reasons for LLIN attrition using 14 household surveys in four countries
Published in
Malaria Journal, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/1475-2875-13-464
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hannah Koenker, Albert Kilian, Celine Zegers de Beyl, Emmanuel O Onyefunafoa, Richmond A Selby, Tarekegn Abeku, Megan Fotheringham, Matthew Lynch

Abstract

While significant focus has been given to net distribution, little is known about what is done with nets that leave a household, either to be used by others or when they are discarded. To better understand the magnitude of sharing LLIN between households and patterns of discarding LLIN, the present study pools data from 14 post-campaign surveys to draw larger conclusions about the fate of nets that leave households.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Kenya 1 2%
Sudan 1 2%
Unknown 49 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 19%
Student > Bachelor 8 15%
Student > Master 6 12%
Other 3 6%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 4 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 19%
Social Sciences 9 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 7 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 27 February 2018.
All research outputs
#2,090,225
of 14,547,163 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#553
of 4,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,977
of 302,367 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#50
of 283 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,547,163 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,176 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 302,367 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 283 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.