Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32131834›Full record

ArticleMalaria journal2020

Costs of insecticide-treated bed net distribution systems in sub-Saharan Africa.

Sara S Scates, Timothy P Finn, Janna Wisniewski, David Dadi, Renata Mandike, Mwinyi Khamis, George Greer, Naomi Serbantez, Sylvester Segbaya, Prince Owusu and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Malaria journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

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

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

15 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Sara S ScatesPMI VectorWorks Project, Department of Tropical Medicine and the Center for Applied Malaria Research and Evaluation, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA. sscates@tulane.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2175-4410
Timothy P FinnPMI VectorWorks Project, Department of Tropical Medicine and the Center for Applied Malaria Research and Evaluation, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Janna WisniewskiPMI VectorWorks Project, Department of Tropical Medicine and the Center for Applied Malaria Research and Evaluation, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
David DadiPMI VectorWorks Project, Johns Hopkins University Center for Communication Programs, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Renata MandikeTanzania National Malaria Control Programme, Dodoma, Tanzania.
Mwinyi KhamisZanzibar Malaria Elimination Programme, Zanzibar, Tanzania.
George GreerU.S. President's Malaria Initiative, US Agency for International Development, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Naomi SerbantezU.S. President's Malaria Initiative, US Agency for International Development, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Sylvester SegbayaPMI VectorWorks Project, Johns Hopkins University Center for Communication Programs, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Prince OwusuPMI VectorWorks Project, Johns Hopkins University Center for Communication Programs, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Jules MihigoU.S. President's Malaria Initiative, US Agency for International Development, Bamako, Mali.
Lilia GerbergU.S President's Malaria Initiative, U.S. Agency for International Development, Washington, D.C., USA.
Angela AcostaPMI VectorWorks Project, Johns Hopkins University Center for Communication Programs, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Hannah KoenkerPMI VectorWorks Project, Johns Hopkins University Center for Communication Programs, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Joshua YukichPMI VectorWorks Project, Department of Tropical Medicine and the Center for Applied Malaria Research and Evaluation, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Johns Hopkins University · USTulane University · USAfrican Malaria Network Trust · TZU.S. President's Malaria Initiative · USZanzibar University · TZ

Funding

United States President's Malaria Initiative, United States Agency for International Development (US) AID-OAA-A-14-00057
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInsecticide-treated nets (ITNs) are one of the most cost-effective measures for preventing malaria. The World Health Organization recommends both large-scale mass distribution campaigns and continuous distributions (CD) as part of a multifaceted strategy to achieve and sustain universal access to ITNs. A combination of these strategies has been effective for scaling up ITN access. For policy makers to make informed decisions on how to efficiently implement CD or combined strategies, information on the costs and cost-effectiveness of these delivery systems is necessary, but relatively few published studies of the cost continuous distribution systems exist.

methodsTo address the gap in continuous distribution cost data, four types of delivery systems-CD through antenatal care services (ANC) and the expanded programme on immunization (EPI) (Ghana, Mali, and mainland Tanzania), CD through schools (Ghana and mainland Tanzania), and a combined community/health facility-based distribution (Zanzibar, Tanzania), as well as mass distributions (Mali)-were costed. Data on costs were collected retrospectively from financial and operational records, stakeholder interviews, and resource use surveys.

resultsOverall, from a full provider perspective, mass distributions and continuous systems delivered ITNs at overlapping economic costs per net distributed (mass distributions: 4.37-4.61 USD, CD channels: 3.56-9.90 USD), with two of the school-based systems and the mass distributions at the lower end of this range. From the perspective of international donors, the costs of the CD systems were, for the most part, less costly than the mass distributions (mass distributions: 4.34-4.55 USD, Ghana and Tanzania 2017 school-based: 3.30-3.69 USD, health facility-based: 3.90-4.55 USD, combined community/health facility 4.55 USD). The 2015 school-based distribution (7.30 USD) and 2016 health facility-based distribution (6.52 USD) programmes in Tanzania were an exception. Mass distributions were more heavily financed by donors, while CD relied more extensively on domestic resource contributions.

conclusionsThese results suggest that CD strategies can continue to deliver nets at a comparable cost to mass distributions, especially from the perspective of the donor.

Indexed as

Africa South of the SaharaCost-Benefit AnalysisDelivery of Health CareFemaleHumansInsecticide-Treated BednetsMalariaMosquito ControlPregnancyPregnant PeoplePublic HealthRetrospective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesContinuous distributionEconomic costFinancial costInsecticide treated netMass campaignMass distributionUniversal coverage

Identifiers

PMID32131834
PMCPMC7055111
OpenAlexW3010795980

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.