Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30732628›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2019

Comparing trap designs and methods for assessing density of synanthropic flies in Odisha, India.

Melissa Bell, Seth Irish, Wolf Peter Schmidt, Soumya Nayak, Thomas Clasen, Mary Cameron

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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 3 countries.

Melissa BellDepartment of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, UK.
Seth IrishDepartment of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, UK.
Wolf Peter SchmidtDepartment of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, UK.
Soumya NayakXavier Institute of Management, Xavier Square, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, 751013, India.
Thomas ClasenFaculty of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Clifton Road, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. thomas.f.clasen@emory.edu.
Mary CameronDepartment of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, UK.
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBUniversity of London · GBEmory University · USXIM University · IN

Funding

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation OPP1008048
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are many different traps available for studying fly populations. The aim of this study was to find the most suitable trap to collect synanthropic fly populations to assess the impact of increased latrine coverage in the state of Odisha, India.

methodsDifferent baits were assessed for use in sticky pot traps (60% sucrose solution, 60 g dry sucrose, half a tomato and an non-baited control), followed by different colours of trap (blue versus yellow) and finally different types of trap (baited sticky pot trap versus sticky card traps). The experiments were undertaken in a semi-urban slum area of Bhubaneswar, the capital of Odisha. The first experiment was conducted in 16 households over 30 nights while experiments 2 and 3 were conducted in 5 households over 30 nights.

resultsThe traps predominantly caught adult Musca domestica and M. sorbens (78.4, 62.6, 83.8% combined total in experiments 1-3 respectively). Non-baited traps did not catch more flies (median 7.0, interquartile range, IQR: 0.0-24.0) compared with baited traps (sucrose solution: 6.5, 1.0-27.0; dry sucrose: 5.0, 0.5-14.5; tomato: 5.0, 1.5-17.5). However, there were significantly more flies collected on blue sticky pot traps, which caught nearly three times as many flies as yellow sticky pot traps (Incidence Rate Ratio, IRR = 2.91; 95% CI: 1.77-4.79); P < 0.001). Sticky card traps (27, 8-58) collected significantly more flies than the non-baited sticky pot traps (10, 1.5-30.5).

conclusionsBlue sticky card traps can be recommended for the capture of synanthropic fly species as they are non-intrusive to residents, easy to use, readily allow for species identification, and collect sufficient quantities of flies over 12 hours for use in monitoring and control programmes.

Indexed as

DipteraAnimalsHousefliesIndiaInsect ControlPopulation DensitySucroseToilet FacilitiesSucroseIndiaMusca domesticaMusca sorbensSynanthropic fliesTrap design

Identifiers

PMID30732628
PMCPMC6367737
OpenAlexW2920418466

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.