MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952472541 · doi:10.1186/s12936-019-2828-5

A community-based education programme to reduce insecticide exposure from indoor residual spraying in Limpopo, South Africa

2019· article· en· W2952472541 on OpenAlexafffund
Brenda Eskenazi, David I. Levine, Stephen Rauch, Muvhulawa Obida, Madelein Crause, Riana Bornman, Jonathan Chevrier

Bibliographic record

VenueMalaria Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPesticide Exposure and Toxicity
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsIndoor residual sprayingEnvironmental healthTropical medicinePublic healthGeographySocioeconomicsVeterinary medicineMedicineEnvironmental protectionMalaria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Indoor residual spraying (IRS), the coating of interior walls of houses with insecticides, is common in malaria-endemic areas. While important in malaria control, IRS potentially exposes residents to harmful insecticides. The World Health Organization recommends steps to minimize exposure; however, no programme has focused on educating populations. METHODS: A dramatic presentation and song were developed by study personnel and performed by lay performers in order to spread awareness of the importance of IRS and to minimize insecticide exposure. Performances were staged at 16 sprayed villages in the Vhembe District of Limpopo, South Africa, at which 592 attendees completed short questionnaires before and after the performance about behaviors that might limit insecticide exposure. Overall indices of the attendees' change in knowledge of precautions to take prior to and after spraying to prevent insecticide exposure were analyzed using hierarchical mixed models to assess the effect of the performance on change in participants' knowledge. RESULTS: Approximately half of attendees lived in homes that had been sprayed for malaria and 62% were female. Over 90% thought it better to allow IRS prior to the presentation, but knowledge of proper precautions to prevent exposure was low. The proportion answering correctly about proper distance from home during spraying increased from 49.4% pre-performance to 62.0% post-performance (RR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.13, 1.41), and the proportion reporting correctly about home re-entry interval after spraying increased from 58.5 to 91.1% (RR = 1.54, 95% CI 1.35, 1.77). Attendees improved in their knowledge about precautions to take prior to and after spraying from mean of 57.9% correct to a mean of 69.7% (β = 12.1%, 95% CI 10.9, 13.4). Specifically, increased knowledge in closing cupboards, removing food and bedding from the home, covering immoveable items with plastic, and leading animals away from the home prior to spraying were observed, as was increased knowledge in sweeping the floors, proper disposal of dead insects, and discarding dirty washrags after spraying. CONCLUSIONS: A dramatic presentation and song were able to increase the attendees' knowledge of precautions to take prior to and after spraying in order to limit their insecticide exposure resulting from IRS. This approach to community education is promising and deserves additional study.

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)0.001
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 score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMalaria JournalSame topicPesticide Exposure and ToxicityFrench-language works237,207