Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32727452›Full record

ArticleMalaria journal2020

"After those nets are torn, most people use them for other purposes": an examination of alternative bed net use in western Kenya.

Ellen M Santos, Jenna E Coalson, Stephen Munga, Maurice Agawo, Elizabeth T Jacobs, Yann C Klimentidis, Mary H Hayden, Kacey C Ernst

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Malaria journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ellen M SantosMel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, 1295 N Martin Ave, Tucson, AZ, 85724, USA. ellenshelly@email.arizona.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5441-5234
Jenna E CoalsonMel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, 1295 N Martin Ave, Tucson, AZ, 85724, USA.
Stephen MungaCentre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, PO Box 1578, Kisumu, 40100, Nyanza, Kenya.
Maurice AgawoCentre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, PO Box 1578, Kisumu, 40100, Nyanza, Kenya.
Elizabeth T JacobsMel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, 1295 N Martin Ave, Tucson, AZ, 85724, USA.
Yann C KlimentidisMel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, 1295 N Martin Ave, Tucson, AZ, 85724, USA.
Mary H HaydenNational Institute for Human Resilience, University of Colorado, University Office Park Building 1867 Suite 200, Boulder, CO, 80918, USA.
Kacey C ErnstMel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, 1295 N Martin Ave, Tucson, AZ, 85724, USA.
University of Arizona · USKenya Medical Research Institute · KE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlternative long-lasting insecticidal net (LLIN) use for purposes other than sleeping protection from mosquitoes is widely debated as a limitation to successful malaria control efforts, yet rarely rigorously studied.

methodsA cross-sectional survey of 1217 households in an epidemic highland site and an endemic lowland site in western Kenya collected information on alternative use in three ways: direct observations, participant self-report, and participant reporting of community-level practices. LLIN misuse was defined as use of an intact net for alternative purposes and repurposing as alternatively using an old or damaged net. Associations between households with observed repurposed nets and universal access and household net use were examined.

resultsHouseholds describe repurposing nets when they are torn and/or old. Repurposed nets were observed in 8.1% (52/643) highlands households and 33.0% (184/574) lowlands households. Repurposed nets served as chicken coops (33% highlands, 20% lowlands), fences (37% highlands, 25% lowlands), tree covers (22% lowlands), curtains (3% highlands), covering bathrooms (1.5% highlands, 9% lowlands), and washing sponges (13% lowlands). No association was found between repurposing and universal access or household net use. Misuse was rare. Of 379 repurposed nets, 4 (1.06%) were in good condition with no holes. Of 1,758 active nets, 13 (0.74%) were misused.

conclusionsAlternative net use in this study involved repurposing rather than misuse. Repurposing was not detrimental to malaria prevention efforts in these communities. Standardized measurement of alternative net use should be used to better understand the practice and its potential impact on the success of malaria interventions.

Indexed as

OwnershipCross-Sectional StudiesFamily CharacteristicsInsecticide-Treated BednetsKenyaMalariaMosquito ControlBed netsKenyaLLINMalaria

Identifiers

PMID32727452
PMCPMC7390200
OpenAlexW3046037092

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.