Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22764301›Full record

SynthesisThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene2012

Reduction of malaria prevalence by indoor residual spraying: a meta-regression analysis.

Dohyeong Kim, Kristen Fedak, Randall Kramer

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 6 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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Differential Influence of Environmental Factors on Malaria Due to Vector Control Interventions in Uganda.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Dohyeong KimDepartment of Public Administration, North Carolina Central University, Durham, North Carolina 27707, USA. dkim@nccu.edu
Kristen Fedak
Randall Kramer

Funding

Implementation Science to Optimize Malaria Vector Control and Disease ManagementR01AI088009 · NIAID · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI KRAMER, RANDALL A · 2010 to 2013
$2.1M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI088009NIAID NIH HHS R01AI088009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Indoor residual spraying (IRS) has become an increasingly popular method of insecticide use for malaria control, and many recent studies have reported on its effectiveness in reducing malaria burden in a single community or region. There is a need for systematic review and integration of the published literature on IRS and the contextual determining factors of its success in controlling malaria. This study reports the findings of a meta-regression analysis based on 13 published studies, which were chosen from more than 400 articles through a systematic search and selection process. The summary relative risk for reducing malaria prevalence was 0.38 (95% confidence interval = 0.31-0.46), which indicated a risk reduction of 62%. However, an excessive degree of heterogeneity was found between the studies. The meta-regression analysis indicates that IRS is more effective with high initial prevalence, multiple rounds of spraying, use of DDT, and in regions with a combination of Plasmodium falciparum and P. vivax malaria.

Indexed as

InsecticidesHumansMalariaPrevalenceRegression AnalysisInsecticides

Identifiers

PMID22764301
PMCPMC3391035

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.