Anambra State Post-Campaign Net Tracking Survey

Anambra LLIN campaign evaluation
because, in general, for scaled responses people tend to choose the highest score (“definitely
could” or “strongly agree”). After recoding all the questions, a mean score was computed to
reflect the household ability/willingness to take action to prevent malaria infection or household
knowledge about malaria. For questions on taking action, the households were then classified
into two groups, the ones which are less likely to take action (score equal or less than 0) and
those which are more likely to take action (score more than 0). For questions on knowledge,
households were also classified into two groups (good knowledge for a score more than 0 and
poor knowledge for a score equal or less than 0).
Ethical considerations
Individual verbal informed consent was sought from all respondents before interviews were
conducted. Before each interviewee was asked to give consent, the interviewer gave a brief
description of the study objectives, the data collection procedure, the potential harm to
participants, the expected benefits, and the voluntary nature of participation at all stages of the
interview. In addition, consent was also sought from community representatives (chiefs).
Participants were informed of the possibility that a repeat interview may be conducted by a
different person to ensure data quality. They were also ensured that data would be kept
confidential and would not be shared with non-project staff. Participants in the final data set
were rendered anonymous by removing the variable “name” and all other information within a
particular cluster that could help to identify individuals or households, and replacing these with
a new numerical identification number generated to uniquely identify the individuals and the
households.
Ethical clearance for the survey was obtained from the Ethical Committee of the Nnamdi
Azikiwe University teaching hospital (NAUTH), reference number NHREC/05/01/2008B.
17