Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35284856›Full record

ReviewCurrent research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases2021

Systematic review of the entomological impact of insecticide-treated nets evaluated using experimental hut trials in Africa.

Rebecca K Nash, Ben Lambert, Raphael NʼGuessan, Corine Ngufor, Mark Rowland, Richard Oxborough, Sarah Moore, Patrick Tungu, Ellie Sherrard-Smith, Thomas S Churcher

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.9field-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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  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 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Rebecca K NashMRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK.
Ben LambertMRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK.
Raphael NʼGuessanInstitut Pierre Richet, Institut National de Santé Publique, Bouaké, Côte d'Ivoire.
Corine NguforLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, UK.
Mark RowlandLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, UK.
Richard OxboroughPMI VectorLink Project, Abt Associates, 6130 Executive Blvd, Rockville, MD, 20852, USA.
Sarah MooreVector Control Product Testing Unit, Ifakara Health Institute, P.O. Box 74, Bagamoyo, Pwani, Tanzania.
Patrick TunguNational Institute for Medical Research (NIMR), P.O. Box 9653, Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania.
Ellie Sherrard-SmithMRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK.
Thomas S ChurcherMRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK.
Imperial College London · GBUniversity of London · GBIfakara Health Institute · TZNational Institute for Medical Research · TZVector (United States) · US

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/R006040/1Medical Research Council MR/R015600/1Medical Research Council MR/T041986/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Resistance of anopheline mosquitoes to pyrethroid insecticides is spreading rapidly across sub-Saharan Africa, diminishing the efficacy of insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) - the primary tool for preventing malaria. The entomological efficacy of indoor vector control interventions can be measured in experimental hut trials (EHTs), where hut structures resemble local housing, but allow the collection of mosquitoes that entered, exited, blood-fed and/or died. There is a need to understand how the spread of resistance changes ITN efficacy and to elucidate factors influencing EHT results, including differences in experimental hut design, to support the development of novel vector control tools. A comprehensive database of EHTs was compiled following a systematic review to identify all known trials investigating ITNs or indoor residual spraying across sub-Saharan Africa. This analysis focuses on EHTs investigating ITNs and uses Bayesian statistical models to characterise the complex interaction between ITNs and mosquitoes, the between-study variability, and the impact of pyrethroid resistance. As resistance rises, the entomological efficacy of ITNs declines. They induce less mortality and are less likely to deter mosquitoes from entering huts. Despite this, ITNs continue to offer considerable personal protection by reducing mosquito feeding until resistance reaches high levels. There are clear associations between the different entomological impacts of ITNs, though there is still substantial variability between studies, some of which can be accounted for by hut design. The relationship between EHT outcomes and the level of resistance (as measured by discriminating dose bioassays) is highly uncertain. The meta-analyses show that EHTs are an important reproducible assay for capturing the complex entomological efficacy of ITNs on blood-feeding mosquitoes. The impact of pyrethroid resistance on these measures appears broadly consistent across a wide geographical area once hut design is accounted for, suggesting results can be extrapolated beyond the sites where the trials were conducted. Further work is needed to understand factors influencing EHT outcomes and how the relationship between outcomes and resistance varies when different methods are used to assess the level of resistance in wild mosquito populations. This will allow more precise estimates of the efficacy of these important vector control tools.

Indexed as

AnophelesCTNExperimental hut trialITNLLINVector

Identifiers

PMID35284856
PMCPMC8906077
OpenAlexW3195489472

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.