ReviewInfectious diseases of poverty2016
Priorities and needs for research on urban interventions targeting vector-borne diseases: rapid review of scoping and systematic reviews.
Review in Infectious diseases of poverty, 2016. 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.
- Women's participation in the prevention and control of dengue using environmental methods in the global south: a qualitative meta-synthesis.International journal for equity in health · 2022Review
- Urbanisation, risk stratification and house infestation with a major vector of Chagas disease in an endemic municipality of the Argentine Chaco.Parasites & vectors · 2020Article
- Impact of a community-based intervention on Aedes aegypti and its spatial distribution in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2020Article
- Article
- Establishing research priorities in prevention and control of vector-borne diseases in urban areas: a collaborative process.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2018Article
- Microcephaly epidemic related to the Zika virus and living conditions in Recife, Northeast Brazil.BMC public health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper highlights the critical importance of evidence on vector-borne diseases (VBD) prevention and control interventions in urban settings when assessing current and future needs, with a view to setting policy priorities that promote inclusive and equitable urban health services. Research should produce knowledge about policies and interventions that are intended to control and prevent VBDs at the population level and to reduce inequities. Such interventions include policy, program, and resource distribution approaches that address the social determinants of health and exert influence at organizational and system levels.
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.