Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28381279›Full record

ReviewParasites & vectors2017

Loa loa vectors Chrysops spp.: perspectives on research, distribution, bionomics, and implications for elimination of lymphatic filariasis and onchocerciasis.

Louise Kelly-Hope, Rossely Paulo, Brent Thomas, Miguel Brito, Thomas R Unnasch, David Molyneux

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Parasites & vectors, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Louise Kelly-HopeDepartment of Parasitology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK. Louise.Kelly-Hope@lstmed.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3330-7629
Rossely PauloDepartment of Parasitology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.
Brent ThomasDepartment of Parasitology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.
Miguel BritoCISA, Health Research Centre of Angola, Caxito, Angola.
Thomas R UnnaschCollege of Public Health, Department of Global Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, USA.
David MolyneuxDepartment of Parasitology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.
Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine · GBClínica Sagrada Esperança · AOUniversity of South Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLoiasis is a filarial disease caused Loa loa. The main vectors are Chrysops silacea and C. dimidiata which are confined to the tropical rainforests of Central and West Africa. Loiasis is a mild disease, but individuals with high microfilaria loads may suffer from severe adverse events if treated with ivermectin during mass drug administration campaigns for the elimination of lymphatic filariasis and onchocerciasis. This poses significant challenges for elimination programmes and alternative interventions are required in L. loa co-endemic areas. The control of Chrysops has not been considered as a viable cost-effective intervention; we reviewed the current knowledge of Chrysops vectors to assess the potential for control as well as identified areas for future research.

resultsWe identified 89 primary published documents on the two main L. loa vectors C. silacea and C dimidiata. These were collated into a database summarising the publication, field and laboratory procedures, species distributions, ecology, habitats and methods of vector control. The majority of articles were from the 1950-1960s. Field studies conducted in Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Nigeria and Sudan highlighted that C. silacea is the most important and widespread vector. This species breeds in muddy streams or swampy areas of forests or plantations, descends from forest canopies to feed on humans during the day, is more readily adapted to human dwellings and attracted to wood fires. Main vector targeted measures proposed to impact on L. loa transmission included personal repellents, household screening, indoor residual spraying, community-based environmental management, adulticiding and larviciding.

conclusionsThis is the first comprehensive review of the major L. loa vectors for several decades. It highlights key vector transmission characteristics that may be targeted for vector control providing insights into the potential for integrated vector management, with multiple diseases being targeted simultaneously, with shared human and financial resources and multiple impact. Integrated vector management programmes for filarial infections, especially in low transmission areas of onchocerciasis, require innovative approaches and alternative strategies if the elimination targets established by the World Health Organization are to be achieved.

Indexed as

Animal DistributionAnimalsDipteraDisease EradicationEcologyHumansInsect VectorsLoaLoiasisOnchocerciasisAfricaBionomicsChrysopsIntegrated vector managementLoa loaLoiasisLymphatic filariasisNeglected tropical diseasesNTDsOnchocerciasisTropical eye wormVector control

Identifiers

PMID28381279
PMCPMC5382514
OpenAlexW2604585886

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.