Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21035838›Full record

ReviewLancet (London, England)2010

Ranking of elimination feasibility between malaria-endemic countries.

Andrew J Tatem, David L Smith, Peter W Gething, Caroline W Kabaria, Robert W Snow, Simon I Hay

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Lancet (London, England), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 90 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
90citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

90 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Global mapping of infectious disease.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2013
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Advances in population-based interventions to control falciparum malaria.Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

30 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Andrew J TatemDepartment of Geography, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA. atatem@ufl .edu
David L Smith
Peter W Gething
Caroline W Kabaria
Robert W Snow
Simon I Hay

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 076951Wellcome Trust 079080
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Experience gained from the Global Malaria Eradication Program (1955-72) identified a set of shared technical and operational factors that enabled some countries to successfully eliminate malaria. Spatial data for these factors were assembled for all malaria-endemic countries and combined to provide an objective, relative ranking of countries by technical, operational, and combined elimination feasibility. The analysis was done separately for Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax, and the limitations of the approach were discussed. The relative rankings suggested that malaria elimination would be most feasible in countries in the Americas and Asia, and least feasible in countries in central and west Africa. The results differed when feasibility was measured by technical or operational factors, highlighting the different types of challenge faced by each country. The results are not intended to be prescriptive, predictive, or to provide absolute assessments of feasibility, but they do show that spatial information is available to facilitate evidence-based assessments of the relative feasibility of malaria elimination by country that can be rapidly updated.

Indexed as

Endemic DiseasesFeasibility StudiesHumansMalaria, FalciparumMalaria, Vivax

Identifiers

PMID21035838
PMCPMC3044847

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.