MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Community-based control of<i>Aedes aegypti</i>by adoption of eco-health methods in Chennai City, India

2012· article· en· W2137293995 on OpenAlexfundno aff
N. Arunachalam, B. K. Tyagi, Miriam Samuel, R. Krishnamoorthi, R. Manavalan, S. C. Tewari, V Ashokkumar, Axel Kroeger, Johannes Sommerfeld, Max Petzold

Bibliographic record

VenuePathogens and Global Health · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research CentreWorld Health OrganizationUNICEFWorld Bank Group
KeywordsDengue feverMosquito controlAedes aegyptiAedesVector (molecular biology)GeographyCluster (spacecraft)SocioeconomicsEnvironmental healthEcologyMedicineBiologyLarvaComputer scienceSociologyMalaria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Dengue is highly endemic in Chennai city, South India, in spite of continuous vector control efforts. This intervention study was aimed at establishing the efficacy as well as the favouring and limiting factors relating to a community-based environmental intervention package to control the dengue vector Aedes aegypti. METHODS: A cluster randomized controlled trial was designed to measure the outcome of a new vector control package and process analysis; different data collection tools were used to determine the performance. Ten randomly selected intervention clusters (neighbourhoods with 100 houses each) were paired with ten control clusters on the basis of ecological/entomological indices and sociological parameters collected during baseline studies. In the intervention clusters, Aedes control was carried out using a community-based environmental management approach like provision of water container covers through community actors, clean-up campaigns, and dissemination of dengue information through schoolchildren. The main outcome measure was reduction in pupal indices (pupae per person index), used as a proxy measure of adult vectors, in the intervention clusters compared to the control clusters. RESULTS: At baseline, almost half the respondents did not know that dengue is serious but preventable, or that it is transmitted by mosquitoes. The stakeholder analysis showed that dengue vector control is carried out by vertically structured programmes of national, state, and local administrative bodies through fogging and larval control with temephos, without any involvement of community-based organizations, and that vector control efforts were conducted in an isolated and irregular way. The most productive container types for Aedes pupae were cement tanks, drums, and discarded containers. All ten intervention clusters with a total of 1000 houses and 4639 inhabitants received the intervention while the ten control clusters with a total of 1000 houses and 4439 inhabitants received only the routine government services and some of the information education and communication project materials. The follow-up studies showed that there was a substantial increase in dengue understanding in the intervention group with only minor knowledge changes in the control group. Community involvement and the partnership among stakeholders (particularly women's self-help groups) worked well. After 10 months of intervention, the pupae per person index was significantly reduced to 0·004 pupae per person from 1·075 (P = 0·020) in the intervention clusters compared to control clusters. There were also significant reductions in the Stegomyia indices: the house index was reduced to 4·2%, the container index to 1·05%, and the Breteau index to 4·3 from the baseline values of 19·6, 8·91, and 30·8 in the intervention arm. CONCLUSION: A community-based approach together with other stakeholders that promoted interventions to prevent dengue vector breeding led to a substantial reduction in dengue vector density.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.199
Threshold uncertainty score0.655

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.362 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations129
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePathogens and Global HealthSame topicMosquito-borne diseases and controlFrench-language works237,207