Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29490649›Full record

ArticleMalaria journal2018

Mosquito net coverage in years between mass distributions: a case study of Tanzania, 2013.

Zawadi M Mboma, Hans J Overgaard, Sarah Moore, John Bradley, Jason Moore, Dennis J Massue, Karen Kramer, Jo Lines, Lena M Lorenz

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Malaria journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05125133 (A Household Randomized Control Trial of Insecticide-treated Eave Nets and Window Screens for Malaria Control in Chalinze District, Tanzania.), which is not on this map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT05125133 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

A Household Randomized Control Trial of Insecticide-treated Eave Nets and Window Screens for Malaria Control in Chalinze District, Tanzania.

TypeinterventionalSponsorIfakara Health InstituteRan2021 to 2022Enrolled1,800ConditionsMalaria,FalciparumArmsITENs + ITWS
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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

9 authors.

Zawadi M MbomaIfakara Health Institute, Bagamoyo, Tanzania.
Hans J OvergaardFaculty of Science and Technology, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, Norway. hans.overgaard@nmbu.no.
Sarah MooreIfakara Health Institute, Bagamoyo, Tanzania.
John BradleyMRC Tropical Epidemiology Group, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Jason MooreIfakara Health Institute, Bagamoyo, Tanzania.
Dennis J MassueIfakara Health Institute, Bagamoyo, Tanzania.
Karen KramerSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.
Jo LinesDepartment of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Lena M LorenzIfakara Health Institute, Bagamoyo, Tanzania.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K012126/1Research Council of Norway 220757/H10
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Government of Tanzania is the main source of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) for its population. Mosquito nets (treated and untreated) are also available in the commercial market. To sustain investments and health gains in the fight against malaria, it is important for the National Malaria Control Programme to monitor LLIN coverage especially in the years between mass distributions and to understand what households do if their free nets are deemed unusable. The aim of this paper was to assess standard LLIN indicators by wealth status in Tanzania in 2013, 2 years after the last mass campaign in 2011, and extend the analysis to untreated nets (UTNs) to investigate how households adapt when nets are not continuously distributed.

methodsBetween October-December 2013, a household survey was conducted in 3398 households in eight districts in Tanzania. Using the Roll Back Malaria indicators, the study analysed: (1) household net ownership; (2) access to nets; (3) population net use and (4) net use:access ratio. Outcomes were calculated for LLINs and UTNs. Results were analysed by socio-economic quintiles and by district.

resultsOnly three of the eight districts had household LLIN ownership of more than 80%. In 2013, less than a quarter of the households had one LLIN for every two people and only half of the population had access to an LLIN. Only the wealthier quintiles increased their net ownership and access to levels above 80% through the addition of UTNs. Overall net use of the population was low (LLINs: 32.8%; UTNs: 9.5%) and net use:access ratio was below target level (LLINs: 0.66; UTN: 0.50). Both measures varied significantly by district.

conclusionsTwo years after the last mass campaign, the percentage of households or population with access to LLINs was low. These findings indicate the average rate at which households in Tanzania lose their nets is higher than the rate at which they acquire new nets. The wealthiest households topped up their household net ownership with UTNs. Efforts to make LLINs available through commercial markets should be promoted, so those who can afford to buy nets purchase LLINs rather than UTNs. Net use was low around 40% and mostly explained by lack of access to nets. However, the use:access ratio was poor in Mbozi and Kahama districts warranting further investigations to understand other barriers to net use.

Indexed as

Cross-Sectional StudiesDisease Transmission, InfectiousHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInsecticide-Treated BednetsMalariaMosquito ControlSocioeconomic FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesTanzaniaLong-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs)Net accessNet ownershipNet useTanzaniaUniversal coverageUntreated nets

Identifiers

PMID29490649
PMCPMC5831856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.