Outdoor malaria transmission risks and social life: a qualitative study in South-Eastern Tanzania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Behaviour changes in mosquitoes from indoor to outdoor biting result in continuing risk of malaria from outdoor activities, including routine household activities and occasional social and cultural practices and gatherings. This study aimed to identify the range of social and cultural gatherings conducted outdoors and their associated risks for mosquito bites. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in four villages in the Kilombero Valley from November 2015 to March 2016. Observations, focus group discussions, and key informant interviews were conducted. The recorded data were transcribed and translated from Swahili to English. Thematic content analysis was used to identify perspectives on the importance of various social and cultural gatherings that incidentally expose people to mosquito bites and malaria infection. RESULTS: Religious, cultural and social gatherings involving the wider community are conducted outdoors at night till dawn. Celebrations include life course events, religious and cultural ceremonies, such as Holy Communion, weddings, gatherings at Easter and Christmas, male circumcision, and rituals conducted to please the gods and to remember the dead. These celebrations, at which there is minimal use of interventions to prevent bites, contribute to individual satisfaction and social capital, helping to maintain a cohesive society. Bed net use while sleeping outdoors during mourning is unacceptable, and there is minimal use of other interventions, such as topical repellents. Long sleeve clothes are used for protection from mosquito bites but provide less protection. CONCLUSION: Gatherings and celebrations expose people to mosquito bites. Approaches to prevent risks of mosquito bites and disease management need to take into account social, cultural and environmental factors. Area specific interventions may be expensive, yet may be the best approach to reduce risk of infection as endemic countries work towards elimination. Focusing on single interventions will not yield the best outcomes for malaria prevention as social contexts and vector behaviour vary.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".