Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35877666›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Observing the distribution of mosquito bites on humans to inform personal protection measures against malaria and dengue vectors.

Winifrida P Mponzi, Johnson K Swai, Emmanuel W Kaindoa, Khamis Kifungo, Alvaro E Eiras, Elis P A Batista, Nancy S Matowo, Peter O Sangoro, Marceline F Finda, Arnold S Mmbando and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Viruses · 2024
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

13 authors at 2 institutions in 5 countries.

Winifrida P MponziEnvironmental Health and Ecological Science Department, Ifakara Health Institute, Ifakara, Tanzania.ORCID 0000-0003-0122-0550
Johnson K SwaiEnvironmental Health and Ecological Science Department, Ifakara Health Institute, Ifakara, Tanzania.ORCID 0000-0003-0144-0422
Emmanuel W KaindoaEnvironmental Health and Ecological Science Department, Ifakara Health Institute, Ifakara, Tanzania.
Khamis KifungoEnvironmental Health and Ecological Science Department, Ifakara Health Institute, Ifakara, Tanzania.
Alvaro E EirasDepartment of Parasitology, Laboratory of Technological Innovation of Vectors Control, Biological Sciences Institute, Federal University of Minas Gerais Belo Horizontal Brazil, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Elis P A BatistaDepartment of Parasitology, Laboratory of Technological Innovation of Vectors Control, Biological Sciences Institute, Federal University of Minas Gerais Belo Horizontal Brazil, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Nancy S MatowoEnvironmental Health and Ecological Science Department, Ifakara Health Institute, Ifakara, Tanzania.
Peter O SangoroEnvironmental Health and Ecological Science Department, Ifakara Health Institute, Ifakara, Tanzania.
Marceline F FindaEnvironmental Health and Ecological Science Department, Ifakara Health Institute, Ifakara, Tanzania.
Arnold S MmbandoEnvironmental Health and Ecological Science Department, Ifakara Health Institute, Ifakara, Tanzania.
Tegemeo GavanaEnvironmental Health and Ecological Science Department, Ifakara Health Institute, Ifakara, Tanzania.
Halfan S NgowoEnvironmental Health and Ecological Science Department, Ifakara Health Institute, Ifakara, Tanzania.ORCID 0000-0003-2789-0261
Fredros O OkumuEnvironmental Health and Ecological Science Department, Ifakara Health Institute, Ifakara, Tanzania.
Ifakara Health Institute · TZUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BR

Funding

Howard Hughes Medical InstituteWellcome TrustWellcome Trust 102350/Z/13
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnderstanding mosquito biting behaviours is important for designing and evaluating protection methods against nuisance biting and mosquito-borne diseases (e.g. dengue, malaria and zika). We investigated the preferred biting sites by Aedes aegypti and Anopheles arabiensis on adult volunteers in standing or sleeping positions; and estimated the theoretical protection limits affordable from protective clothing or repellent-treated footwear.

methodsAdult volunteers dressed in shorts and t-shirts were exposed to infection-free laboratory-reared mosquitoes inside screened chambers from 6am to noon (for day-biting Ae. aegypti) or 6pm to midnight (night-biting An. arabiensis). Attempted bites on different body parts were recorded. Comparative observations were made on same volunteers while wearing sandals treated with transfluthrin, a vapour-phase pyrethroid that kills and repels mosquitoes.

resultsAn. arabiensis bites were mainly on the lower limbs of standing volunteers (95.9% of bites below the knees) but evenly-distributed over all exposed body surfaces when the volunteers were on sleeping positions (only 28.8% bites below knees). Ae. aegypti bites were slightly concentrated on lower limbs of standing volunteers (47.7% below knees), but evenly-distributed on sleeping volunteers (23.3% below knees). Wearing protective clothing that leave only hands and head uncovered (e.g. socks + trousers + long-sleeved shirts) could theoretically prevent 78-83% of bites during sleeping, and at least 90% of bites during non-sleeping hours. If the feet are also exposed, protection declines to as low as 36.3% against Anopheles. The experiments showed that transfluthrin-treated sandals reduced An. arabiensis by 54-86% and Ae. aegypti by 32-39%, but did not change overall distributions of bites.

conclusionBiting by An. arabiensis and Ae. aegypti occur mainly on the lower limbs, though this proclivity is less pronounced in the Aedes species. However, when hosts are on sleeping positions, biting by both species is more evenly-distributed over the exposed body surfaces. High personal protection might be achieved by simply wearing long-sleeved clothing, though protection against Anopheles particularly requires covering of feet and lower legs. The transfluthrin-treated footwear can reduce biting risk, especially by An. arabiensis. These findings could inform the design and use of personal protection tools (both insecticidal and non-insecticidal) against mosquitoes and mosquito-borne diseases.

Indexed as

AedesAnophelesDengueInsect Bites and StingsInsect RepellentsMalariaZika VirusZika Virus InfectionAdultAnimalsHumansMosquito ControlMosquito VectorsInsect Repellents

Identifiers

PMID35877666
PMCPMC9312397
OpenAlexW4287510387

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.