Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36271422›Full record

Trial reportMalaria journal2022

House screening for malaria control: views and experiences of participants in the RooPfs trial.

Caroline Jones, A Matta, Margaret Pinder, Umberto D'Alessandro, Jakob Knudsen, Steve W Lindsay

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Malaria journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. House modifications for preventing malaria.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Caroline JonesKEMRI-Wellcome Trust Programme, Kilifi, Kenya. cjones@kemri-wellcome.org.
A MattaMedical Research Council Unit The Gambia at the London, School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Banjul, The Gambia.
Margaret PinderMedical Research Council Unit The Gambia at the London, School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Banjul, The Gambia.
Umberto D'AlessandroMedical Research Council Unit The Gambia at the London, School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Banjul, The Gambia.
Jakob KnudsenRoyal Danish Academy-Architecture, Design, Conservation, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Steve W LindsayDepartment of Biosciences, Durham University, Durham, UK.
Durham University · GBMRC Unit the Gambia · GMKenya Medical Research Institute · KERoyal Danish Academy – Architecture, Design, Conservation · DK

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/M007383/1MRC-DfID-Wellcome Trust Global Health Trials MR/M007383/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe housing stock of rural sub-Saharan Africa is changing rapidly. With millions of new homes required over the coming decades, there is an opportunity to protect residents by screening homes from malaria mosquitoes. This study, undertaken in the Upper River Region of The Gambia, explores local perceptions of what a good house should provide for its inhabitants and responses to living in a house that has been modified as part of a randomized control trial designed to assess whether improved housing provided additional protection against clinical malaria in children (the RooPfs trial).

methodsThis descriptive, exploratory study was undertaken over 22 months using mixed-methods (informal conversations, observations, focus group discussions, photovoice, and a questionnaire survey) in a parallel convergent design. Analysis was conducted across the data sets using a framework approach. Following coding, the textual data were charted by a priori and emerging themes. These themes were compared with the quantitative survey results. The nature and range of views about housing and the RooPfs study modifications and the relationships among them were identified and described.

resultsThe data were derived from a total of 35 sets of observations and informal conversations in 10 villages, 12 discussions with the photovoice photographers, 26 focus group discussions (across 13 villages) and 391 completed questionnaires. The study participants described a 'good house' as one with a corrugate-metal roof, cement walls (preferably cement block, but mud block covered with cement plaster was also an acceptable and cheaper substitute) and well-fitting doors. These features align with local perceptions of a modern house that provides social status and protection from physical harms. The RooPfs modifications were largely appreciated, although poor workmanship caused concerns that houses had become insecure. However, the long-term trusting relationship with the implementing institution and the actions taken to rectify problems provided reassurance and enhanced acceptability.

conclusionIn developing housing to address population needs in Africa, attention should be paid to local perceptions of what is required to make a house secure for its inhabitants, as well as providing a healthy environment.

Indexed as

AnophelesMalariaAfrica South of the SaharaAnimalsChildHousingHumansMosquito ControlAcceptabilityHousingMalariaPerceptions

Identifiers

PMID36271422
PMCPMC9585744
OpenAlexW4306976810

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.