Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32321534›Full record

ArticleMalaria journal2020

Opinions of key stakeholders on alternative interventions for malaria control and elimination in Tanzania.

Marceline F Finda, Nicola Christofides, Javier Lezaun, Brian Tarimo, Prosper Chaki, Ann H Kelly, Ntuli Kapologwe, Paul Kazyoba, Basiliana Emidi, Fredros O Okumu

Open access · goldAbstract read
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 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

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

10 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Marceline F FindaEnvironmental Health and Ecological Sciences Department, Ifakara Health Institute, P. O. Box 53, Ifakara, Tanzania. lfinda@ihi.or.tz.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4460-4415
Nicola ChristofidesSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, 1 Smuts Avenue, Braamfontein, 2000, South Africa.
Javier LezaunInstitute for Science, Innovation and Society, School of Anthropology and Museum Ethnography, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Brian TarimoEnvironmental Health and Ecological Sciences Department, Ifakara Health Institute, P. O. Box 53, Ifakara, Tanzania.
Prosper ChakiEnvironmental Health and Ecological Sciences Department, Ifakara Health Institute, P. O. Box 53, Ifakara, Tanzania.
Ann H KellyDepartment of Global Health and Social Medicine, King's College, London, UK.
Ntuli KapologwePresident's Office, Regional Administration and Local Government, P. O Box 1923, Dodoma, Tanzania.
Paul KazyobaNational Institute for Medical Research, 3 Barack Obama Drive, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Basiliana EmidiNational Institute for Medical Research, 3 Barack Obama Drive, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Fredros O OkumuEnvironmental Health and Ecological Sciences Department, Ifakara Health Institute, P. O. Box 53, Ifakara, Tanzania.
Ifakara Health Institute · TZAfrican Malaria Network Trust · TZKing's College London · GBNational Institute for Medical Research · TZUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of the Witwatersrand · ZA

Funding

Application of Novel Transgenic technology & Inherited Symbionts to Vector Control AVPP0027/1Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation OPP1177156Consortium for Advanced Research Training in Africa 087547/Z/08/ZHoward Hughes Medical Institute OPP1099295
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMalaria control in Tanzania currently relies primarily on long-lasting insecticidal nets and indoor residual spraying, alongside effective case management and behaviour change communication. This study explored opinions of key stakeholders on the national progress towards malaria elimination, the potential of currently available vector control interventions in helping achieve elimination by 2030, and the need for alternative interventions that could be used to supplement malaria elimination efforts in Tanzania.

methodsIn this exploratory qualitative study, Focus group discussions were held with policy-makers, regulators, research scientists and community members. Malaria control interventions discussed were: (a) improved housing, (b) larval source management, (c) mass drug administration (MDA) with ivermectin to reduce vector densities, (d) release of modified mosquitoes, including genetically modified or irradiated mosquitoes, (e) targeted spraying of mosquito swarms, and (f) spatial repellents.

resultsLarval source management and spatial repellents were widely supported across all stakeholder groups, while insecticide-spraying of mosquito swarms was the least preferred. Support for MDA with ivermectin was high among policy makers, regulators and research scientists, but encountered opposition among community members, who instead expressed strong support for programmes to improve housing for poor people in high transmission areas. Policy makers, however, challenged the idea of government-supported housing improvement due to its perceived high costs. Techniques of mosquito modification, specifically those involving gene drives, were viewed positively by community members, policy makers and regulators, but encountered a high degree of scepticism among scientists. Overall, policy-makers, regulators and community members trusted scientists to provide appropriate advice for decision-making.

conclusionStakeholder opinions regarding alternative malaria interventions were divergent except for larval source management and spatial repellents, for which there was universal support. MDA with ivermectin, housing improvement and modified mosquitoes were also widely supported, though each faced concerns from at least one stakeholder group. While policy-makers, regulators and community members all noted their reliance on scientists to make informed decisions, their reasoning on the benefits and disadvantages of specific interventions included factors beyond technical efficiency. This study suggests the need to encourage and strengthen dialogue between research scientists, policy makers, regulators and communities regarding new interventions.

Indexed as

Public OpinionDisease EradicationMalariaStakeholder ParticipationTanzaniaAlternative interventionsMalaria controlMalaria eliminationOpinionStakeholdersTanzania

Identifiers

PMID32321534
PMCPMC7178586
OpenAlexW3017650769

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.