Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35778744›Full record

ArticleMalaria journal2022

A closer look at the WHO cone bioassay: video analysis of the hidden effects of a human host on mosquito behaviour and insecticide contact.

Angela Hughes, Agnes Matope, Mischa Emery, Keith Steen, Gregory Murray, Hilary Ranson, Philip J McCall, Geraldine M Foster

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Malaria journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
6.8field-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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Behavioural responses ofCurrent research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Angela Hughes *Department of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, L3 5QA, UK.
Agnes Matope *Department of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, L3 5QA, UK.
Mischa EmeryDepartment of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, L3 5QA, UK.
Keith SteenDepartment of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, L3 5QA, UK.
Gregory MurrayDepartment of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, L3 5QA, UK.
Hilary RansonDepartment of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, L3 5QA, UK.
Philip J McCallDepartment of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, L3 5QA, UK.
Geraldine M FosterDepartment of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, L3 5QA, UK. Geraldine.Foster@lstmed.ac.uk.
Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine · GB

Funding

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation OPP1159078
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe WHO cone test is one of three tests currently used to evaluate the efficacy of insecticide-treated bed nets (ITNs). It generates two test outputs, knockdown and 24-h mortality, both indicative of immediate toxicity but that reveal little about the nature of mosquito and ITN interaction or how results translate to real-world settings.

methodsA human arm held 5 mm behind the net surface acted as a host attractant during cone tests and a smartphone was used to capture mosquito behaviour in the cone. Post-exposure blood feeding and survival for nine days were recorded; ingested blood meal size was determined by measuring excreted haematin. Four strains of Anopheles gambiae (insecticide susceptible: Kisumu and N'gousso; insecticide resistant: Banfora and VK7) were tested with and without the host attractant using untreated, Permanet 2.0 and Olyset nets. Video recordings were scan sampled every five seconds to record mosquito positions on either the net, in flight or in contact with the cone. Generalized estimating equations were used to analyse all data except survival within nine days which was analysed using Weighted Cox Regression.

resultsNet contact was the most frequently recorded behaviour in all Anopheles spp. strains on all nets. Adding the human host as attractant triggered excitatory behaviours: in all strains, the magnitude of net contact was significantly decreased compared to tests without a host. ITN exposure altered the observed behaviour of the two susceptible strains, which exhibited a decreased response to the host during ITN tests. The resistant strains did not alter their behaviour during ITN tests. Significantly less net contact was observed during Olyset Net tests compared to Permanet 2.0. The host presence affected survival after exposure: Banfora and VK7 mosquitoes exposed to Permanet 2.0 with a host lived longer compared to tests performed without a host. However, mosquitoes that blood-fed and survived long enough to digest the blood meal did not exhibit significantly reduced longevity regardless of the presence of the host attractant.

conclusionsSimple modifications to the WHO cone test and extension of post-test monitoring beyond the current 24 h enable detailed behavioural characterizations of individual ITNs to be compiled. The effects observed from testing with a host and including blood feeding suggest that more representative estimates of true of ITN efficacy are gained with these modifications than when using the current testing protocol.

Indexed as

AnophelesInsecticidesInsecticide-Treated BednetsAnimalsBiological AssayHumansWorld Health OrganizationInsecticidesAnophelesBednetBehaviourBioassayControlInsecticideITNMalariaMosquitoPyrethroidVector

Identifiers

PMID35778744
PMCPMC9248144
OpenAlexW4283746686

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.