Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30558671›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2018

Field evaluation of personal protection methods against outdoor-biting mosquitoes in Lao PDR.

Julie-Anne A Tangena, Phoutmany Thammavong, Somsanith Chonephetsarath, James G Logan, Paul T Brey, Steve W Lindsay

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review of Issues on Residual Malaria Transmission.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2021
    Article
  10. 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 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Julie-Anne A TangenaMedical Entomology & Biology of Disease Vectors Laboratory, Institut Pasteur du Laos, Vientiane, Lao PDR. jtangena@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8188-4498
Phoutmany ThammavongMedical Entomology & Biology of Disease Vectors Laboratory, Institut Pasteur du Laos, Vientiane, Lao PDR.
Somsanith ChonephetsarathMedical Entomology & Biology of Disease Vectors Laboratory, Institut Pasteur du Laos, Vientiane, Lao PDR.
James G LoganDepartment of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Paul T BreyMedical Entomology & Biology of Disease Vectors Laboratory, Institut Pasteur du Laos, Vientiane, Lao PDR.
Steve W LindsayDepartment of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Institut Pasteur du LaosDurham University · GBLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBMinistry of Health · LA

Funding

Agence Française de Développement CZZ 1809 AAMichelin Corporate Foundation YERSIN project
6 · The paper itself

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

AnimalsCulicidaeFemaleHumansInsect Bites and StingsInsecticidesInsect RepellentsLaosMaleMosquito ControlPermethrinInsecticidesInsect RepellentsPermethrinMosquito coilPara-menthane-3,8-diol (PMD)Permethrin-treated clothingTopical repellent

Identifiers

PMID30558671
PMCPMC6296151
OpenAlexW2905302631

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.