ArticleMalaria journal2020
Mass testing and treatment for malaria followed by weekly fever screening, testing and treatment in Northern Senegal: feasibility, cost and impact.
Article in Malaria journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Reactive Case Detection and Treatment and Reactive Drug Administration for Reducing Malaria Transmission: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2024Pooled it
- Testing and treatment for malaria elimination: a systematic review.Malaria journal · 2023Pooled it
- Integrated vector and parasite management for malaria control in high-endemic areas: pummel and pin strategy to prevent malaria setbacks.Malaria journal · 2025Review
- Smartphone conjunctiva photography for malaria risk stratification in asymptomatic school age children.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Implementation and fidelity of reactive surveillance and response strategies for malaria elimination: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ public health · 2025Article
- Proactive home-based malaria management in rural communities of Bassar Health District in northern Togo from 2014 to 2017: PECADOM + , a pilot experiment.Malaria journal · 2024Article
- Malaria prevalence and use of control measures in an area with persistent transmission in Senegal.PloS one · 2024Article
- Differential insecticide resistance inHeliyon · 2023Article
- Reactive Case Detection Strategy for Malaria Control and Elimination: A 12 Year Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis from 25 Malaria-Endemic Countries.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2023Review
- Altitude, not potential larval habitat availability, explains pronounced variation in Plasmodium falciparum infection prevalence in the western Kenya highlands.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Mass screening and treatment (MSaT) for identifying and treating asymptomatic cases of malaria-malaria elimination demonstration project (MEDP), Mandla, Madhya Pradesh.Malaria journal · 2022Article
- Evaluation of the Efficacy of FludoraTropical medicine and infectious disease · 2022Article
- Correction to: Mass testing and treatment for malaria followed by weekly fever screening, testing and treatment in Northern Senegal: feasibility, cost and impact.Malaria journal · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
20 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPopulation-wide interventions using malaria testing and treatment might decrease the reservoir of Plasmodium falciparum infection and accelerate towards elimination. Questions remain about their effectiveness and evidence from different transmission settings is needed.
methodsA pilot quasi-experimental study to evaluate a package of population-wide test and treat interventions was conducted in six health facility catchment areas (HFCA) in the districts of Kanel, Linguère, and Ranérou (Senegal). Seven adjacent HFCAs were selected as comparison. Villages within the intervention HFCAs were stratified according to the 2013 incidences of passively detected malaria cases, and those with an incidence ≥ 15 cases/1000/year were targeted for a mass test and treat (MTAT) in September 2014. All households were visited, all consenting individuals were tested with a rapid diagnostic test (RDT), and, if positive, treated with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine. This was followed by weekly screening, testing and treatment of fever cases (PECADOM++) until the end of the transmission season in January 2015. Villages with lower incidence received only PECADOM++ or case investigation. To evaluate the impact of the interventions over that transmission season, the incidence of passively detected, RDT-confirmed malaria cases was compared between the intervention and comparison groups with a difference-in-difference analysis using negative binomial regression with random effects on HFCA.
resultsDuring MTAT, 89% (2225/2503) of households were visited and 86% (18,992/22,170) of individuals were tested, for a combined 77% effective coverage. Among those tested, 291 (1.5%) were RDT positive (range 0-10.8 by village), of whom 82% were < 20 years old and 70% were afebrile. During the PECADOM++ 40,002 visits were conducted to find 2784 individuals reporting fever, with an RDT positivity of 6.5% (170/2612). The combination of interventions resulted in an estimated 38% larger decrease in malaria case incidence in the intervention compared to the comparison group (adjusted incidence risk ratio = 0.62, 95% CI 0.45-0.84, p = 0.002). The cost of the MTAT was $14.3 per person.
conclusionsIt was operationally feasible to conduct MTAT and PECADOM++ with high coverage, although PECADOM++ was not an efficient strategy to complement MTAT. The modest impact of the intervention package suggests a need for alternative or complementary strategies.
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.