ArticleBMC public health2026
Community participation and operational lessons from implementing a protective coating as a novel vector control tool in dengue-endemic neighborhoods of Cúcuta and Los Patios, Colombia.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe control of Aedes-borne diseases (dengue, Zika, chikungunya, yellow fever) is a high public health priority in tropical and subtropical countries. The adoption of new vector control tools, such as protective coating (PC), requires understanding the social dynamics that influence their acceptance and feasibility. This study investigated the experiences and perspectives of diverse stakeholders involved in a vector control project in urban Colombia, with the aim of assessing community acceptance and operational feasibility. Insights gained are important for optimizing implementation and gauging the broader viability of innovative vector control strategies.
methodsA qualitative descriptive study was conducted using focus group discussions and in-depth interviews with 70 key stakeholders, including community leaders (n = 3), community volunteers (n = 30), vector control staff (n = 7), supervisors (n = 5), and community residents (n = 25). Data was collected after the intervention and analyzed using inductive thematic content analysis with open coding. Participation was voluntary and confidential.
resultsThe protective coating was perceived as feasible and generally well accepted by the community. Facilitating factors included the involvement of community leaders, strong volunteer commitment, and effective coordination among institutions. Challenges such as trust issues, logistical constraints, and safety concerns were identified and addressed through adaptive strategies, including adjusted work schedules and strengthened communication.
conclusionCommunity involvement, effective communication, and adaptive management were key to the successful implementation of the protective coating and helped address logistical challenges. The lessons learned provide useful information for scaling up novel vector control approaches in similar urban settings in Latin America.
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.