ArticleMalaria journal2026
Context-specific drivers of non-regular long-lasting insecticidal net use in the Greater Mekong Subregion.
Article in Malaria journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLong-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) are essential for malaria prevention, yet consistent use remains suboptimal. This study assessed LLIN use and associated factors in Thailand and Myanmar across diverse transmission contexts.
methodsWe analyzed cross-sectional data from 13,459 individuals attending malaria service points in three districts in Thailand and two townships in Myanmar (2017-2024). LLIN use was categorized as daily, intermittent, or non-use. Logistic regression identified factors linked to non-regular use in each country. A directed acyclic graph (DAG) illustrated hypothesized causal pathways.
resultsAmong 3,062 participants in Myanmar, 16.9% reported intermittent or non-use. Higher odds were observed among individuals aged 5-14 years (aOR = 1.87, 95% CI: 1.29-2.75), 15-34 years (aOR = 3.42, 95% CI: 2.07-5.67), and ≥ 35 years (aOR = 4.42, 95% CI: 2.50-7.86), Rakhine ethnicity (aOR = 3.54, 95% CI: 2.76-4.57), residence in Paletwa (aOR = 20.9, 95% CI: 5.29-109), uncertain malaria history (aOR = 8.03, 95% CI: 3.61-18.4), and Plasmodium falciparum infection (aOR = 2.87, 95% CI: 2.02-4.06). Among 10,397 participants in Thailand, 31.2% reported intermittent or non-use. Significant factors included older age (aOR = 2.73, 95% CI: 2.07-3.62 for 15-34 years), male sex (aOR = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.56-1.91), agricultural occupation (aOR = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.04-1.95), residence in Bannang Sata (aOR = 17.9, 95% CI: 14.4-22.4) or Saba Yoi (aOR = 34.4, 95% CI: 23.3-52.3), P. falciparum (aOR = 3.61, 95% CI: 1.71-7.78), P. vivax (aOR = 2.74, 95% CI: 2.38-3.17), and lower odds with uncertain malaria history (aOR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.35-0.68).
conclusionNon-regular LLIN use was common and linked to demographic, occupational, and clinical factors. Context-specific strategies are needed to improve adherence and support malaria elimination goals.
Indexed as
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.