Preliminary results on the control of Aedes spp. in a remote Guatemalan community vulnerable to dengue, chikungunya and Zika virus: community participation and use of low-cost ecological ovillantas for mosquito control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To study the effectiveness of an integrated intervention of health worker training, a low-cost ecological mosquito ovitrap, and community engagement on Aedes spp. mosquito control over 10 months in 2015 in an urban remote community in Guatemala at risk of dengue, chikungunya and Zika virus transmission. Methods: We implemented a three-component integrated intervention consisting of: web-based training of local health personnel in vector control, cluster-randomized assignment of an ecological modified ovitrap (ovillantas: ovi=egg, llanta=tire) or standard ovitraps to capture Aedes spp. mosquito eggs (no efforts have been taken to determine the exact Aedes species at this moment), and community engagement to promote participation of community members and health personnel in the understanding and maintenance of ovitraps for mosquito control. The intervention was implemented in local collaboration with Guatemala’s Ministry of Health’s Vector Control Programme, and in international collaboration with the National Institute of Public Health in Mexico. Findings: Eighty percent of the 25 local health personnel enrolled in the training programme received accreditation of their improved knowledge of vector control. When ovillantas were used in a cluster of ovitraps (several in proximity), significantly more eggs were trapped by ecological ovillantas than standard ovitraps over the 10 month (42 week) study period (t=5.2577; p<0.05). Repetitive filtering and recycling of the attractant solution (or water) kept the ovillanta clean, free from algae growth. Among both community members and health workers, the levels of knowledge, interest, and participation in community mosquito control and trapping increased. Recommendations for enhancing and sustaining community mosquito control were identified. Conclusion: Our three-component integrated intervention proved beneficial to this remote community at risk of mosquito-borne diseases such as dengue, chikungunya, and Zika. The combination of training of health workers, cluster use of low-cost ecological ovillanta to destroy the second generation of mosquitoes, and community engagement ensured the project met local needs and fostered collaboration and participation of the community, which can help improve sustainability. The ovillanta intervention and methodology may be modified to target other species such as Culex , should it be established that such mosquitoes carry Zika virus in addition to Aedes .
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".