Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42158537›Full record

ArticleBMJ public health2026

Project ITCH: cross-sectional surveys to understand residential vector control attitudes and practices across New England.

Fatma Tufa, Johanna Ravenhurst, Elissa S Ballman, Neeta P Connally, Jannelle Couret, Nolan Fernandez, Allison M Gardner, Jeff R Garnas, William J Landesman, Alexis L White and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ 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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

14 authors.

Fatma TufaNew England Center of Excellence in Vector-Borne Diseases, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Johanna RavenhurstNew England Center of Excellence in Vector-Borne Diseases, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Elissa S BallmanNew England Center of Excellence in Vector-Borne Diseases, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Neeta P ConnallyNew England Center of Excellence in Vector-Borne Diseases, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Jannelle CouretNew England Center of Excellence in Vector-Borne Diseases, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Nolan FernandezNew England Center of Excellence in Vector-Borne Diseases, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Allison M GardnerNew England Center of Excellence in Vector-Borne Diseases, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Jeff R GarnasNew England Center of Excellence in Vector-Borne Diseases, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
William J LandesmanNew England Center of Excellence in Vector-Borne Diseases, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Alexis L WhiteNew England Center of Excellence in Vector-Borne Diseases, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Guang XuNew England Center of Excellence in Vector-Borne Diseases, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Stephen M RichNew England Center of Excellence in Vector-Borne Diseases, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Andrew A LoverNew England Center of Excellence in Vector-Borne Diseases, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2181-3559
Thomas N MatherNew England Center of Excellence in Vector-Borne Diseases, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To understand the attitudes and prevalence of peridomestic vector control across New England, and to identify factors associated with self-reported residential vector control uptake. Methods: An online-based survey captured 4855 responses from households across New England in 2023 and 2024. Multivariable Poisson regression was used to quantify factors, including attitudes towards ticks and mosquitoes, motivations for vector control and property characteristics, that are associated with total household residential vector control practices. Results: The majority of respondents reported using at least one household-level vector control intervention in 2023 (88%) and 2024 (93%). Overall, higher levels of concern for ticks, mosquitoes and mosquito-borne disease showed a gradient response and were associated with statistically significant increasing rates of peridomestic vector control; however, concern for tick-borne disease was not associated with vector control usage (p values >0.05). After adjustment for socio-economics, yard size, property type and levels of concern, Maine and Vermont both had lower incidence rates of total vector control interventions compared with the rest of New England ((adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR)=0.89; 95% CI 0.84 to 0.93; p value=<0.001), (aIRR=0.89, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.96; p value=0.002), respectively). Finally, protecting the health of family members had a strong association with peridomestic vector control uptake. Conclusions: This study reveals factors associated with increased uptake of peridomestic vector control, including levels of concern, state of residence and primary motivation for vector control use. Results support previous evidence and fill in gaps in geographical spread and the vector control interventions assessed. Future theory-based programming can help close gaps and increase uptake of peridomestic vector control.

Indexed as

Communicable Disease ControlCommunicationDisease VectorsEpidemiologic FactorsRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID42158537
PMCPMC13182369

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.