ArticlePLOS global public health2025
Acceptability of mass drug administration for lymphatic filariasis in Baglung Municipality of Nepal: A mixed-method study.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence and Determinants of Never Treatment During Mass Drug Administration for Lymphatic Filariasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Approaches to quantifying acceptability of pharmaceutical interventions for neglected tropical diseases: A scoping review.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Neglected Tropical Diseases Elimination in the Philippines: Challenges and Gaps.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLymphatic filariasis (LF), a neglected tropical disease, remains a significant public health challenge in endemic regions including Baglung Municipality of Nepal. This study investigates the acceptability of mass drug administration (MDA) for LF in Baglung Municipality of Nepal. METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional, mixed-method study was conducted in Baglung Municipality among 272 community people. Three Focus Group Discussions (FGD) were conducted among 25 commmunity members. Quantitative data were collected using pretested structured questionnaires and FGDs were conducted using structured guideline. Probability proportional to size sampling was done to select desired number of participants. EpiData 3.1 was used for data entry and IBM SPSS 22 was employed for quantitative data analysis. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression was applied. Similarly, thematic analysis was done for qualitative data analysis.
resultsThe study revealed that 84.2% were aware of MDA with 48.5% of participants having good knowledge about LF. About 59.3% and 45.2% had a positive attitude towards MDA and LF respectively. More than four fifth (80.5%) of the participants had accepted the MDA campaign with 91.5% having received MDA medication. Significant factors for MDA acceptability included educational status, attitude towards MDA, fear of side effects, and medication received. Qualitative data highlighted the strong influence of effective communication by health workers on MDA acceptance.
conclusionKnowledge on LF was found low among the participants with lesser proportion having positive attitude towards LF; highlighting the need for an increase in knowledge and attitude towards LF. The study shows the high level of acceptability of MDA; primarily influenced by the effective communication by health workers and the public trust in health services. Health workers led community-based strategies and programs are recommended for the high acceptance of MDA and the development of a positive attitude for better compliance.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.