Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29514668›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2018

Integrated cost-benefit analysis of tsetse control and herd productivity to inform control programs for animal African trypanosomiasis.

Anne Meyer, Hannah R Holt, Farikou Oumarou, Kalinga Chilongo, William Gilbert, Albane Fauron, Chisoni Mumba, Javier Guitian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Essential gene prediction inComputational and structural biotechnology journal · 2020
    Article
  12. 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

8 authors.

Anne MeyerDepartment of Pathobiology and Population Sciences, Royal Veterinary College, Hatfield, UK.
Hannah R HoltDepartment of Pathobiology and Population Sciences, Royal Veterinary College, Hatfield, UK. hholt@rvc.ac.uk.
Farikou OumarouMission Spéciale d'Eradication des Glossines, Ngaoundéré, Cameroon.
Kalinga ChilongoDepartment of Veterinary Services, Tsetse and Trypanosomiasis Control Unit, Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock, Lusaka, Zambia.
William GilbertDepartment of Pathobiology and Population Sciences, Royal Veterinary College, Hatfield, UK.
Albane FauronDepartment of Pathobiology and Population Sciences, Royal Veterinary College, Hatfield, UK.
Chisoni MumbaDepartment of Disease Control, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zambia, P.O. Box 32379, Lusaka, Zambia.
Javier GuitianDepartment of Pathobiology and Population Sciences, Royal Veterinary College, Hatfield, UK.

Funding

Department for International Development Aries code 202040-101
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnimal African trypanosomiasis (AAT) and its tsetse vector are responsible for annual losses estimated in billions of US dollars ($). Recent years have seen the implementation of a series of multinational interventions. However, actors of AAT control face complex resource allocation decisions due to the geographical range of AAT, diversity of ecological and livestock systems, and range of control methods available.

methodsThe study presented here integrates an existing tsetse abundance model with a bio-economic herd model that captures local production characteristics as well as heterogeneities in AAT incidence and breed. These models were used to predict the impact of tsetse elimination on the net value of cattle production in the districts of Mambwe, in Zambia, and Faro et Déo in Cameroon. The net value of cattle production under the current situation was used as a baseline, and compared with alternative publicly funded control programmes. In Zambia, the current baseline is AAT control implemented privately by cattle owners (Scenario Z0). In Cameroon, the baseline (Scenario C0) is a small-scale publicly funded tsetse control programme and privately funded control at farm level. The model was run for 10 years, using a discount rate of 5%.

resultsCompared to Scenario C0, benefit-cost ratios (BCR) of 4.5 (4.4-4.7) for Scenario C1 (tsetse suppression using insecticide treatment of cattle (ITC) and traps + maintenance with ITC barrier), and 3.8 (3.6-4.0) for Scenario C2 (tsetse suppression using ITC and traps + maintenance with barrier of targets), were estimated in Cameroon. For Zambia, the benefit-cost ratio calculated for Scenarios Z1 (targets, ITC barrier), Z2 (targets, barrier traps), Z3 (aerial spraying, ITC barrier), and Z4 (aerial spraying, barrier traps) were 2.3 (1.8 - 2.7), 2.0 (1.6-2.4), 2.8 (2.3-3.3) and 2.5 (2.0-2.9), respectively. Sensitivity analysis showed that the profitability of the projects is relatively resistant to variations in the costs of the interventions and their technical efficiency.

conclusionsIt is envisioned that the methodologies presented here will be useful for the evaluation and design of existing and future control programmes, ensuring they have tangible benefits in the communities they are targeting.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisAfrica South of the SaharaAnimalsCameroonCattleCattle DiseasesCommunicable Disease ControlHumansInsect ControlInsecticidesModels, EconomicTrypanosomiasis, BovineTsetse FliesZambiaInsecticidesBio-economic modelCameroonCattleCost-benefit analysisSub-Saharan AfricaTrypanosomiasisTsetseVector controlZambia

Identifiers

PMID29514668
PMCPMC5842553

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.