Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33757533›Full record

ArticleMalaria journal2021

A retail audit of mosquito control products in Busia County, western Kenya.

Prisca A Oria, Vincent Moshi, Julius I Odero, Sheila Ekodir, April Monroe, Steven A Harvey, Eric Ochomo, Danielle Piccinini Black

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Malaria journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
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.

Prisca A OriaCentre for Global Health Research (CGHR), Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Kisumu, Kenya.
Vincent MoshiCentre for Global Health Research (CGHR), Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Kisumu, Kenya.
Julius I OderoCentre for Global Health Research (CGHR), Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Kisumu, Kenya.
Sheila EkodirCentre for Global Health Research (CGHR), Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Kisumu, Kenya.
April MonroeJohns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Steven A HarveyJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Eric OchomoCentre for Global Health Research (CGHR), Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Kisumu, Kenya.
Danielle Piccinini BlackJohns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, Baltimore, MD, USA. danielle.piccinini@jhu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8188-1676

Funding

UNITAID 2018-29-UND
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundApproximately 70% of Kenya's population is at risk for malaria. The core vector control methods in Kenya are insecticide-treated mosquito nets (ITNs) and indoor residual spraying, with supplementary larval source management. In 2015, 21% of ITNs were accessed through the private retail sector. Despite the private sector role in supplying mosquito control products (MCPs), there is little evidence on the availability, sales trends, and consumer preferences for MCPs other than ITNs. This study, a component of a larger research programme focused on evaluating a spatial repellent intervention class for mosquito-borne disease control, addressed this evidence gap on the role of the private sector in supplying MCPs.

methodsA cross-sectional survey was deployed in a range of retail outlets in Busia County to characterize MCP availability, sales trends, and distribution channels. The questionnaire included 32 closed-ended and four open-ended questions with short answer responses. Descriptive analysis of frequency counts and percentages was carried out to glean insights about commercially available MCPs and the weighted average rank was used to determine consumer preferences for MCPs. Open-ended data was analysed thematically.

resultsRetail outlets that stocked MCPs commonly stocked mosquito coils (73.0%), topical repellents (38.1%), aerosol insecticide sprays (23.8%) and ITNs (14.3%). Overall, retailers reported the profits from selling MCPs were adequate and they overwhelmingly planned to continue stocking the products. Of respondents who stocked MCPs, 96.8% responded that sales increased during long rains and 36.5% that sales also surged during short rains. ITNs and baby-size nets were often delivered by the wholesaler. Retailers of aerosol sprays, mosquito coils, and topical repellents either collected stock from the wholesaler or products were delivered to them. Other commercially available MCPs included insecticide incense sticks, electric mosquito strikers, insecticide soaps, electrically heated insecticide mats, and electric insecticide emanators, indicating a well-established market.

conclusionsThe wide range of MCPs in local retail outlets within the study area suggests the need and demand for mosquito control tools, in addition to ITNs, that are affordable, easy to use and effective. The presence of a wide range of MCPs, is a promising sign for the introduction of a spatial repellent intervention class of products that meets consumer needs and preferences.

Indexed as

Cross-Sectional StudiesInsecticidesInsecticide-Treated BednetsInsect RepellentsKenyaMosquito ControlPrivate SectorInsecticidesInsect RepellentsAerosol spraysInsecticide‐treated mosquito netsKenyaMalariaMosquito coilsMosquito controlRetail auditRetail outletsSpatial repellentTopical repellents

Identifiers

PMID33757533
PMCPMC7989247

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.