Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28797252›Full record

ArticleMalaria journal2017

Evaluation of community-based continuous distribution of long-lasting insecticide-treated nets in Toamasina II District, Madagascar.

Celine Zegers de Beyl, Albert Kilian, Andrea Brown, Mohamad Sy-Ar, Richmond Ato Selby, Felicien Randriamanantenasoa, Jocelyn Ranaivosoa, Sixte Zigirumugabe, Lilia Gerberg, Megan Fotheringham and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Malaria journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

12 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Celine Zegers de BeylMalaria Consortium, London, UK.
Albert KilianTropical Health, LLP, Montagut, Spain.
Andrea BrownJohns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Mohamad Sy-ArJohns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Richmond Ato SelbyJohns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Felicien RandriamanantenasoaCatholic Relief Services, Antananarivo, Madagascar.
Jocelyn RanaivosoaCatholic Relief Services, Antananarivo, Madagascar.
Sixte ZigirumugabePresident's Malaria Initiative, Antananarivo, Madagascar.
Lilia GerbergPresident's Malaria Initiative, US Agency for International Development, Washington, DC, USA.
Megan FotheringhamPresident's Malaria Initiative, US Agency for International Development, Washington, DC, USA.
Matthew LynchJohns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Hannah KoenkerJohns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, Baltimore, MD, USA. hkoenker@jhu.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-8960-4297
Johns Hopkins University · USU.S. President's Malaria Initiative · USCatholic Relief Services · USMalaria Consortium · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundContinuous distribution of insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) is thought to be an effective mechanism to maintain ITN ownership and access between or in the absence of mass campaigns, but evidence is limited. A community-based ITN distribution pilot was implemented and evaluated in Toamasina II District, Madagascar, to assess this new channel for continuous ITN distribution.

methodsBeginning 9 months after the December 2012 mass campaign, a community-based distribution pilot ran for an additional 9 months, from September 2013 to June 2014. Households requested ITN coupons from community agents in their village. After verification by the agents, households exchanged the coupon for an ITN at a distribution point. The evaluation was a two-stage cluster survey with a sample size of 1125 households. Counterfactual ITN ownership and access were calculated by excluding ITNs received through the community pilot.

resultsAt the end of the pilot, household ownership of any ITN was 96.5%, population access to ITN was 81.5 and 61.5% of households owned at least 1 ITN for every 2 people. Without the ITNs provided through the community channel, household ownership of any ITN was estimated at 74.6%, population access to an ITN at 55.5%, and households that owned at least 1 ITN for 2 people at only 34.7%, 18 months after the 2012 campaign. Ownership of community-distributed ITNs was higher among the poorest wealth quintiles. Over 80% of respondents felt the community scheme was fair and simple to use.

conclusionsHousehold ITN ownership and population ITN access exceeded RBM targets after the 9-month community distribution pilot. The pilot successfully provided coupons and ITNs to households requesting them, particularly for the least poor wealth quintiles, and the scheme was well-perceived by communities. Further research is needed to determine whether community-based distribution can sustain ITN ownership and access over the long term, how continuous availability of ITNs affects household net replacement behaviour, and whether community-based distribution is cost-effective when combined with mass campaigns, or if used with other continuous channels instead of mass campaigns.

Indexed as

Mosquito ControlOwnershipAdultDelivery of Health CareFamily CharacteristicsFemaleHumansInsecticide-Treated BednetsMadagascarMalariaMaleMiddle AgedPilot Projects

Identifiers

PMID28797252
PMCPMC5553758
OpenAlexW2744149083

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.