ArticleBMJ open2022
Vulnerability of populations to malaria after indoor residual spraying is withdrawn from areas where its use has previously been sustained: a protocol for a systematic review.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. 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.
- Strategic resource allocation for malaria elimination in endemic settings: a systematic review of cost-effectiveness evidence.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of outdoor residual spraying, insecticide-treated nets, and their combination for zoonotic malaria control in Sabah, Malaysia: a comparative analysis.Malaria journal · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of family health education in malaria elimination programmes: a scoping review.Malaria journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWith its proven effectiveness, indoor residual spraying (IRS) as a malaria vector control strategy forms one of the reliable vector control strategies, especially when at least 80% of the population is covered. However, to date, there is uncertainty regarding the consequences of IRS withdrawal on malaria control when there is no clear exit strategy in place. Therefore, there is a need to comprehensively update literature regarding malaria burden indicators when IRS is withdrawn following sustained use. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A systematic search of studies published between 2000 and 2022 will be performed in CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, ProQuest, PsychInfo, Scopus and OpenGrey. Preset eligibility criteria will be used to identify studies for inclusion by two independent reviewers. Title/abstracts will first be screened and potentially eligible ones screened using their full-text publications. Any conflicts/discrepancies at the two stages will be resolved through regular discussion sessions. Included studies will be extracted to capture study and patient characteristics and relevant outcomes (malaria incidence and malaria vector abundance). Relevant tools will be used to assess the risk of bias in the studies measuring the impact of withdrawal. A meta-analysis will be performed if sufficient homogeneity exists; otherwise, data arising will be presented using tables and by employing narrative synthesis techniques. Heterogeneity will be assessed using a combination of visual inspection of the forest plot along with consideration of the χ ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not applicable for this study since no original data will be collected. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. Furthermore, this systematic review will inform the design of exit strategies for IRS-based programmes in malaria-endemic areas. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022310655.
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.