ArticleBMC public health2026
Utilization of malaria control interventions and associated factors among women of reproductive age in Lira City, Northern Uganda.
Article in BMC public health, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Malaria remains a major public health concern in Uganda, with prevalence in Lira City rising sharply in recent years despite ongoing interventions. Women of reproductive age are particularly vulnerable, yet little is known about their use of available preventive measures. This study assessed knowledge, attitudes, perceptions, and utilization of malaria control interventions, and examined factors influencing their uptake.A cross-sectional study was conducted with 629 randomly selected women of reproductive age in Lira City. Quantitative data were collected using semi structured questionnaires, while qualitative insights were obtained through focus group discussions. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize knowledge, attitudes, perceptions, and use of insecticide-treated nets (ITNs), intermittent preventive treatment (IPT), and indoor residual spraying (IRS). Chi-square tests were used to examine associations, and multivariate logistic regression was applied to identify predictors of utilization. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically to explore barriers to uptake, and findings were triangulated with quantitative results for validation and deeper interpretation.ITN utilization was high (84.1%), IPT uptake moderate (68%), and IRS coverage low (32.8%). Almost all participants (96.8%) were knowledgeable about ITNs, mainly gained through health workers, and expressed positive attitudes toward malaria prevention (mean score: 4.34, SD = 0.67). While most (91.9%) perceived IRS as effective, concerns included bad odor and discomfort (51.7%), doubt about safety (21.9%), and effectiveness (17.3%). Age, type of house, challenges faced with nets, marital status, and exposure to health education were significant predictors of utilization.Despite widespread ITN use, IRS uptake remains limited due to persistent concerns and misconceptions. Strengthening targeted health education, addressing community fears, and improving access to interventions are critical for enhancing malaria control in high-transmission settings like Lira City.
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.