↓ Skip to main content

Re-imagining malaria: heterogeneity of human and mosquito behaviour in relation to residual malaria transmission in Cambodia

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
170 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
Re-imagining malaria: heterogeneity of human and mosquito behaviour in relation to residual malaria transmission in Cambodia
Published in
Malaria Journal, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12936-015-0689-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charlotte Gryseels, Lies Durnez, René Gerrets, Sambunny Uk, Sokha Suon, Srun Set, Pisen Phoeuk, Vincent Sluydts, Somony Heng, Tho Sochantha, Marc Coosemans, Koen Peeters Grietens

Abstract

In certain regions in Southeast Asia, where malaria is reduced to forested regions populated by ethnic minorities dependent on slash-and-burn agriculture, malaria vector populations have developed a propensity to feed early and outdoors, limiting the effectiveness of long-lasting insecticide-treated nets (LLIN) and indoor residual spraying (IRS). The interplay between heterogeneous human, as well as mosquito behaviour, radically challenges malaria control in such residual transmission contexts. This study examines human behavioural patterns in relation to the vector behaviour. The anthropological research used a sequential mixed-methods study design in which quantitative survey research methods were used to complement findings from qualitative ethnographic research. The qualitative research existed of in-depth interviews and participant observation. For the entomological research, indoor and outdoor human landing collections were performed. All research was conducted in selected villages in Ratanakiri province, Cambodia. Variability in human behaviour resulted in variable exposure to outdoor and early biting vectors: (i) indigenous people were found to commute between farms in the forest, where malaria exposure is higher, and village homes; (ii) the indoor/outdoor biting distinction was less clear in forest housing often completely or partly open to the outside; (iii) reported sleeping times varied according to the context of economic activities, impacting on the proportion of infections that could be accounted for by early or nighttime biting; (iv) protection by LLINs may not be as high as self-reported survey data indicate, as observations showed around 40% (non-treated) market net use while (v) unprotected evening resting and deep forest activities impacted further on the suboptimal use of LLINs. The heterogeneity of human behaviour and the variation of vector densities and biting behaviours may lead to a considerable proportion of exposure occurring during times that people are assumed to be protected by the distributed LLINs. Additional efforts in improving LLIN use during times when people are resting in the evening and during the night might still have an impact on further reducing malaria transmission in Cambodia.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 170 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
Unknown 168 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 40 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 21%
Student > Master 29 17%
Student > Bachelor 20 12%
Student > Postgraduate 9 5%
Other 25 15%
Unknown 12 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 17%
Social Sciences 27 16%
Environmental Science 13 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 6%
Other 30 18%
Unknown 19 11%

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 25 April 2015.
All research outputs
#4,208,953
of 5,035,276 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,754
of 1,997 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,586
of 174,450 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#102
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,035,276 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 1,997 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. 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 174,450 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 105 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.