Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33064783›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2020

Impact of tiny targets on Glossina fuscipes quanzensis, the primary vector of human African trypanosomiasis in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Inaki Tirados, Andrew Hope, Richard Selby, Fabrice Mpembele, Erick Mwamba Miaka, Marleen Boelaert, Mike J Lehane, Steve J Torr, Michelle C Stanton

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 60 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. Article
  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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Inaki TiradosDepartment of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9771-4880
Andrew HopeDepartment of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Richard SelbyDepartment of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3034-8345
Fabrice MpembeleProgramme National de Lutte contre la Trypanosomiase Humaine Africaine, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Erick Mwamba MiakaProgramme National de Lutte contre la Trypanosomiase Humaine Africaine, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Marleen BoelaertDepartment of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.
Mike J LehaneDepartment of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Steve J TorrDepartment of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9550-4030
Michelle C StantonDepartment of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1754-4894
Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine · GBProgramme National Multisectoriel de Lutte contre le sida · CDInstituut voor Tropische Geneeskunde · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the past 20 years there has been a >95% reduction in the number of Gambian Human African trypanosomiasis (g-HAT) cases reported globally, largely as a result of large-scale active screening and treatment programmes. There are however still foci where the disease persists, particularly in parts of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Additional control efforts such as tsetse control using Tiny Targets may therefore be required to achieve g-HAT elimination goals. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of Tiny Targets within DRC. In 2015-2017, pre- and post-intervention tsetse abundance data were collected from 1,234 locations across three neighbouring Health Zones (Yasa Bonga, Mosango, Masi Manimba). Remotely sensed dry season data were combined with pre-intervention tsetse presence/absence data from 332 locations within a species distribution modelling framework to produce a habitat suitability map. The impact of Tiny Targets on the tsetse population was then evaluated by fitting a generalised linear mixed model to the relative fly abundance data collected from 889 post-intervention monitoring sites within Yasa Bonga, with habitat suitability, proximity to the intervention and intervention duration as covariates. Immediately following the introduction of the intervention, we observe a dramatic reduction in fly catches by > 85% (pre-intervention: 0.78 flies/trap/day, 95% CI 0.676-0.900; 3 month post-intervention: 0.11 flies/trap/day, 95% CI 0.070-0.153) which is sustained throughout the study period. Declines in catches were negatively associated with proximity to Tiny Targets, and while habitat suitability is positively associated with abundance its influence is reduced in the presence of the intervention. This study adds to the body of evidence demonstrating the impact of Tiny Targets on tsetse across a range of ecological settings, and further characterises the factors which modify its impact. The habitat suitability maps have the potential to guide the expansion of tsetse control activities in this area.

Indexed as

Insect VectorsTsetse FliesAnimalsDemocratic Republic of the CongoEcosystemInsect ControlInsecticidesNitrilesPyrethrinsTrypanosomiasis, AfricandecamethrinInsecticidesNitrilesPyrethrins

Identifiers

PMID33064783
PMCPMC7608941
OpenAlexW3092828384

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.