ArticleJournal of public health in Africa2020
Modelling malaria reduction in a highly endemic country: Evidence from household survey, climate, and program data in Zambia.
Article in Journal of public health in Africa, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effects of modern housing on malaria transmission in different endemic zones: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Malaria journal · 2024Pooled it
- Feasibility of self-testing for acute malaria using rapid diagnostic tests in three peri-urban sub-Saharan African community settings.Malaria journal · 2025Article
- Time-Varying Effects of Meteorological Variables on Malaria Epidemiology in the Context of Interrupted Control Efforts in the Amazon Rainforest, 2000-2017.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Substantial efforts have seen the reduction in malaria prevalence from 33% in 2006 to 19.4% in 2015 in Zambia. Many studies have used effect measures, such as odds ratios, of malaria interventions without combining this information with coverage levels of the interventions to assess how malaria prevalence would change if these interventions were scaled up. We contribute to filling this gap by combining intervention coverage information with marginal predictions to model the extent to which key interventions can bring down malaria in Zambia. We used logistic regression models and derived marginal effects using repeated cross-sectional survey data from the Malaria Indicator Survey (MIS) datasets for Zambia collected in 2010, 2012 and 2015. Average monthly temperature and rainfall data were obtained from climate explorer a satellite-generated database. We then conducted a counterfactual analysis using the estimated marginal effects and various hypothetical levels of intervention coverage to assess how different levels of coverage would affect malaria prevalence. Increasing IRS and ITNs from the 2015 levels of coverage of 28.9% and 58.9% respectively to at least 80% and rising standard housing to 20% from the 13.4% in 2015 may bring malaria prevalence down to below 15%. If the percentage of modern houses were increased further to 90%, malaria prevalence might decrease to 10%. Other than ITN and IRS, streamlining and increasing of the percentage of standard houses in malaria fight would augment and bring malaria down to the levels needed for focal malaria elimination. The effects of ITNs, IRS and Standard housing were pronounced in high than low epidemiological areas.
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.