MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2729424649 · doi:10.1186/s12936-017-1924-7

Community perceptions on outdoor malaria transmission in Kilombero Valley, Southern Tanzania

2017· article· en· W2729424649 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Irene Moshi, Halfan S. Ngowo, Angel Dillip, Daniel Msellemu, Edith P. Madumla, Fredros O. Okumu, Maureen Coetzee, Ladslaus L. Mnyone, Lenore Manderson

Bibliographic record

VenueMalaria Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMalaria Research and Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAfrican Population and Health Research CenterDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, IndiaCenter for Academic Research and Training in AnthropogenyWellcome TrustStyrelsen för Internationellt UtvecklingssamarbeteBill and Melinda Gates FoundationGrand Challenges CanadaCarnegie Corporation of New YorkWellcomeJohn D. and Catherine T. MacArthur FoundationFord FoundationDepartment for International DevelopmentGoogle.org
KeywordsMalariaIndoor residual sprayingTanzaniaTransmission (telecommunications)Environmental healthAnophelesAnopheles gambiaeVector (molecular biology)Psychological interventionMosquito controlGeographySocioeconomicsEnvironmental protectionPlasmodium falciparumMedicineBiologyEnvironmental planningImmunologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The extensive use of indoor residual spraying (IRS) and insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) in Africa has contributed to a significant reduction in malaria transmission. Even so, residual malaria transmission persists in many regions, partly driven by mosquitoes that bite people outdoors. In areas where Anopheles gambiae s.s. is a dominant vector, most interventions target the reduction of indoor transmission. The increased use of ITNs/LLINs and IRS has led to the decline of this species. As a result, less dominant vectors such as Anopheles funestus and Anopheles arabiensis, both also originally indoor vectors but are increasingly biting outdoors, contribute more to residual malaria transmission. The study reports the investigated community perceptions on malaria and their implications of this for ongoing outdoor malaria transmission and malaria control efforts. METHODS: This was a qualitative study conducted in two rural villages and two peri-urban areas located in Kilombero Valley in south-eastern Tanzania. 40 semi-structured in-depth interviews and 8 focus group discussions were conducted with men and women who had children under the age of five. The Interviews and discussions focused on (1) community knowledge of malaria transmission, and (2) the role of such knowledge on outdoor malaria transmission as a contributing factor to residual malaria transmission. RESULTS: The use of bed nets for malaria prevention has been stressed in a number of campaigns and malaria prevention programmes. Most people interviewed believe that there is outdoor malaria transmission since they use interventions while indoors, but they are unaware of changing mosquito host-seeking behaviour. Participants pointed out that they were frequently bitten by mosquitoes during the evening when outdoors, compared to when they were indoors. Most participants stay outdoors in the early evening to undertake domestic tasks that cannot be conducted indoors. House structure, poor ventilation and warm weather conditions were reported to be the main reasons for staying outdoors during the evening. Participants reported wearing long sleeved clothes, fanning and slapping themselves, using repellents, and burning cow dung and neem tree leaves to chase away mosquitoes. CONCLUSIONS: Community understanding of multiple prevention strategies is crucial given changes in mosquito host seeking behaviour and the increased incidence of outdoor biting. The current low use of outdoor control measures is attributed largely to limited awareness of outdoor transmission. Improved community understanding of outdoor malaria transmission is critical: efforts to reduce or eliminate malaria transmission will not be successful if the control of outdoor transmission is not emphasized.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations54
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMalaria JournalSame topicMalaria Research and ControlFrench-language works237,207