ArticleThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene2014
Conservation efforts and malaria in the Brazilian Amazon.
Article in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outbreaks and incidence of vector-borne diseases in Colombia (2007-2024): Impact of climate change and deforestationBiomedica : revista del Instituto Nacional de Salud · 2025Article
- Article
- Amazon deforestation drives malaria transmission, and malaria burden reduces forest clearing.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019Article
- Comparison of malaria incidence rates and socioeconomic-environmental factors between the states of Acre and Rondônia: a spatio-temporal modelling study.Malaria journal · 2019Article
- Public health impacts of ecosystem change in the Brazilian Amazon.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2015Article
- Response to the critique by Hahn and others entitled "Conservation and malaria in the Brazilian Amazon".The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
We respond to Valle and Clark, who assert that "conservation efforts may increase malaria burden in the Brazilian Amazon," because the relationship between forest cover and malaria incidence was stronger than the effect of the deforestation rate. We contend that their conclusion is flawed because of limitations in their methodology that we discuss in detail. Most important are the exclusion of one-half the original data without a discussion of selection bias, the lack of model adjustment for either population growth or migration, and the crude classifications of land cover and protected areas that lead to aggregation bias. Of greater significance, we stress the need for caution in the interpretation of data that could have profound effects on regional land use decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.