ArticleParasites & vectors2018
Field evaluation of personal protection methods against outdoor-biting mosquitoes in Lao PDR.
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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Volatile pyrethroid spatial repellents for preventing mosquito bites: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EBioMedicine · 2025Pooled it
- Trial
- Identifying gaps in protection from malaria vector biting in rural Cambodia using an entomological assessment and human behaviour observations.Malaria journal · 2025Article
- The effect of novel mosquito bite prevention tools on Anopheles minimus landing and key secondary endpoints: semi-field evaluations in Thailand.Malaria journal · 2024Article
- Field evaluation of a volatile pyrethroid spatial repellent and etofenprox treated clothing for outdoor protection against forest malaria vectors in Cambodia.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Occupational exposure to malaria, leishmaniasis and arbovirus vectors in endemic regions: A systematic review.Current research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases · 2024Review
- Evaluation of surface versus total permethrin content in permethrin-treated clothing: Implications for protection against mosquitoes.Pathogens and global health · 2022Article
- Article
- Review of Issues on Residual Malaria Transmission.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2021Article
- Methods for Testing Repellents Against Bed Bugs (Hemiptera: Cimicidae).Journal of economic entomology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProtecting people outdoors against mosquito-borne diseases is a major challenge. Here we compared commercially available personal protection methods to identify the most effective method for outdoor use in northern Lao PDR.
methodsFrom June to August 2016 the protective efficacy of treatments were compared in a secondary forest during the afternoon and a village during the evening. Comparisons were made using a replicated Latin square design between: (i) short permethrin-treated overalls; (ii) long permethrin-treated overalls; (iii) short untreated overalls with para-menthane-3,8-diol (PMD) applied topically; (iv) short permethrin-treated overalls plus PMD applied topically; (v) short untreated overalls with metofluthrin coils in a metal casing worn on a belt; and (vi) long untreated overalls. Short untreated overalls served as the control. Cone tests were conducted on the treated and untreated fabric before and after field experiments. A questionnaire survey was used to measure social acceptability.
resultsMosquito coils in a metal casing worn on a belt resulted in 92.3% (95% confidence interval, CI: 88.9-94.6%). landing protection from female mosquitoes in the afternoon and 68.8% (95% CI: 41.7-83.3%) protection in the evening compared to short untreated clothing. PMD was protective both when combined with short permethrin-treated overalls (afternoon, 68.2%, 95% CI: 52.6-78.7%; evening, 52.3%, 95% CI: 33.8-65.7%) and when used in combination with short untreated overalls (afternoon, 55.0%, 95% CI: 41.7-65.2%; evening, 25.2%, 95% CI: 9.4-38.2%). Whilst long permethrin-treated overalls were protective (afternoon, 61.1%, 95% CI: 51.4-68.8%; evening, 43.0%, 95% CI: 25.5-56.4%), short permethrin-treated overalls and long untreated overalls were not. Exposure to new permethrin-treated fabric in cone tests resulted in 25.0% (95% CI, 17.8-32.2%) and 26.2% (95% CI 16.7-35.8%) mortality for susceptible Ae. albopictus and susceptible Ae. aegypti, respectively. There was a loss of efficacy of permethrin-treated clothing after use in the field, with 3 min knockdown rates of Ae. albopictus and 1 h knockdown of Ae. aegypti decreasing over time. Participants considered all treatments acceptable.
conclusionsThe portable mosquito coils were highly protective against outdoor biting mosquitoes, although there are safety concerns related to its use. The combination of permethrin-treated clothing and PMD repellent represent an alternative treatment for protection against outdoor-biting mosquitoes.
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.