Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28699563›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2017

The women made it work: fuzzy transitive closure of the results chain in a dengue prevention trial in Mexico.

Neil Andersson, Mario Beauchamp, Elizabeth Nava-Aguilera, Sergio Paredes-Solís, Mateja Šajna

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Fuzzy cognitive mapping in participatory research and decision making: a practice review.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Journal of mixed methods research · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Neil AnderssonCentro de Investigación de Enfermedades Tropicales (CIET), Universidad Autónoma de Guerrero, Acapulco, Guerrero, Mexico. andersson@ciet.org.
Mario BeauchampCIETcanada, 160 George Street, Ottawa, Canada.
Elizabeth Nava-AguileraCentro de Investigación de Enfermedades Tropicales (CIET), Universidad Autónoma de Guerrero, Acapulco, Guerrero, Mexico.
Sergio Paredes-SolísCentro de Investigación de Enfermedades Tropicales (CIET), Universidad Autónoma de Guerrero, Acapulco, Guerrero, Mexico.
Mateja ŠajnaDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Universidad Autónoma de Guerrero · MXCanadian Institute for Energy Training · CAUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA modified theory of planned behaviour (acronym CASCADA) proposes that Conscious knowledge precedes a change in Attitude, which in turn precedes positive deviations from negative Subjective norms, intention to Change, perception of Agency to change, Discussion of possible action, and Action itself. We used this as a results chain to investigate gender-specific behaviour dynamics in chemical-free dengue prevention.

methodsSecondary analysis of the Mexican arm of a cluster randomised controlled trial used household survey data on intermediate outcomes of dengue prevention behaviour. We used a matrix of odds ratios between outcomes, transformed to a symmetrical range (-1, 1), to compute fuzzy transitive closure of the results chain for control and intervention clusters, then for male and female respondents separately in each group. Transitive closure of a map computes the influence of each factor on each other factor, taking account of all influences in the system. Cumulative net influence was the sum of influences across the results chain.

resultsResponses of 5042 women and 1143 men in 45 intervention clusters contrasted with those of 5025 women and 1179 men in 45 control clusters. Control clusters showed a distal block (negative influence) in the results chain with a cumulative net influence of 0.88; intervention clusters showed no such block and a cumulative net influence of 1.92. Female control respondents, like the overall control picture, showed a distal block, whereas female intervention responses showed no such blocks (cumulative net influence 0.78 and 1.73 respectively). Male control respondents showed weak distal blocks. Male intervention responses showed several new negative influences and a reduction of cumulative net influence (1.38 in control and 1.11 in intervention clusters).

conclusionsThe overall influence of the intervention across the results chain fits with the trial findings, but is different for women and men. Among women, the intervention overcame blocks and increased the cumulative net influence of knowledge on action. Among men, the intervention did not reinforce prevention behaviour. This might be related to emphasis, during the intervention, on women's participation and empowerment. The fuzzy transitive closure of the CASCADA map usefully highlights the differences between gender-specific results chains.

trial registrationISRCTN27581154 .

Indexed as

Gender IdentityHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeMosquito ControlPower, PsychologicalAdultDengueFemaleHumansMaleMexicoOdds RatioPsychological TheorySurveys and QuestionnairesBehaviour change modelCommunity mobilisationDengueFuzzy transitive closure

Identifiers

PMID28699563
PMCPMC5506572
OpenAlexW2619548473

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.