Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27716420›Full record

ArticleInfectious diseases of poverty2016

Household perceptions and subjective valuations of indoor residual spraying programmes to control malaria in northern Uganda.

Zachary S Brown, Randall A Kramer, David Ocan, Christine Oryema

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infectious diseases of poverty, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Zachary S BrownDepartment of Agricultural and Resource Economics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA. zack_brown@ncsu.edu.
Randall A KramerNicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
David OcanGulu University, Gulu Town, Uganda.
Christine OryemaGulu University, Gulu Town, Uganda.

Funding

Research Core 3: Environmental Health PolicyP30ES011961 · NIEHS · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI DI GIULIO, RICHARD · 2004 to 2009
$4.1M
NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES011961
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInsecticide-based tools remain critical for controlling vector-borne diseases in Uganda. Securing public support from targeted populations for such tools is an important component in sustaining their long-run effectiveness. Yet little quantitative evidence is available on the perceived benefits and costs of vector control programmes among targeted households.

methodsA survey was administered to a clustered random sample of 612 households in Gulu and Oyam districts of northern Uganda during a period of very high malaria transmission and following a pilot indoor residual spray (IRS) programme. A discrete choice experiment was conducted within the survey, in which respondents indicated their preferences for different IRS programmes relative to money compensation in a series of experimentally controlled, hypothetical choice sets. The data were analysed using conditional logit regression models to estimate respondents' willingness to accept (WTA) some amount of money compensation in lieu of foregone malaria risk reductions. Latent class models were used to analyse whether respondent characteristics predicted WTA.

resultsAverage WTA is estimated at $8.94 annually for a 10 % reduction in malaria risk, and additional co-benefits of IRS were estimated to be worth on average $54-$56 (depending on insecticide type) per round of IRS. Significant heterogeneity is observed: Four in five household heads in northern Uganda have high valuations for IRS programmes, while the remaining 20 % experience costly side effects of IRS (valued at between $2 and $3 per round). Statistically significant predictors of belonging to the high-value group include respondent gender, mean age of household members, participation in previous IRS, basic knowledge of mosquito reproduction, and the number of mosquito nets owned. Proxies for household income and wealth are not found to be statistically significant predictors of WTA.

conclusionsThis study suggests that the majority of people in areas of high malaria transmission like northern Uganda place a high value on vector control programmes using IRS. However, there is significant heterogeneity in terms of the perceived side effects (positive and negative). This has implications for sustaining public support for these programmes in the long-term.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeMosquito ControlAdultAgedAnimalsFamily CharacteristicsFemaleHumansInsecticidesMalariaMaleMiddle AgedUgandaYoung AdultInsecticides

Identifiers

PMID27716420
PMCPMC5053089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.