Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38037072›Full record

ArticleMalaria journal2023

Assessing national vector control micro-planning in Zambia using the 2021 malaria indicator survey.

Irene Kyomuhangi, Andrew Andrada, Zhiyuan Mao, Derek Pollard, Christina Riley, Adam Bennett, Busiku Hamainza, Hannah Slater, Justin Millar, John M Miller and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Malaria journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. 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

12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Irene KyomuhangiSchool of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Tulane University, 1440 Canal Street, Suite 2350, New Orleans, LA, USA. ikyomuhangi@tulane.edu.
Andrew AndradaSchool of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Tulane University, 1440 Canal Street, Suite 2350, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Zhiyuan MaoSchool of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Tulane University, 1440 Canal Street, Suite 2350, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Derek PollardAKROS, Lusaka, Zambia.
Christina RileyAKROS, Lusaka, Zambia.
Adam BennettPATH, Seattle, WA, USA.
Busiku HamainzaNational Malaria Elimination Centre, Lusaka, Zambia.
Hannah SlaterPATH, Seattle, WA, USA.
Justin MillarPATH, Seattle, WA, USA.
John M MillerPATH, Lusaka, Zambia.
Thomas P EiseleSchool of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Tulane University, 1440 Canal Street, Suite 2350, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Kafula SilumbeNational Malaria Elimination Centre, Lusaka, Zambia.
Tulane University · USNational HIV/AIDS/STI/TB Council · ZMProgram for Appropriate Technology in Health · USSeattle University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2020, the Zambia National Malaria Elimination Centre targeted the distribution of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor-residual spraying (IRS) campaigns based on sub-district micro-planning, where specified geographical areas at the health facility catchment level were assigned to receive either LLINs or IRS. Using data from the 2021 Malaria Indicator Survey (MIS), the objectives of this analysis were to (1) assess how well the micro-planning was followed in distributing LLINs and IRS, (2) investigate factors that contributed to whether households received what was planned, and (3) investigate how overall coverage observed in the 2021 MIS compared to the 2018 MIS conducted prior to micro-planning.

methodsHouseholds' receipt of ≥ 1 LLIN, and/or IRS within the past 12 months in the 2021 MIS, was compared against the micro-planning area under which the households fell. GPS points for 3,550 households were overlayed onto digitized micro-planning maps in order to determine what micro-plan the households fell under, and thus whether they received their planned intervention. Mixed-effects regression models were conducted to investigate what factors affected whether these households: (1) received their planned intervention, and (2) received any intervention. Finally, coverage indicators between the 2021 and 2018 MIS were compared.

resultsOverall, 60.0% (95%CI 55.4, 64.4) of households under a micro-plan received their assigned intervention, with significantly higher coverage of the planned intervention in LLIN-assigned areas (75.7% [95%CI 69.5, 80.9]) compared to IRS-assigned areas (49.4% [95%CI: 44.4, 54.4]). Regression analysis indicated that households falling under the IRS micro-plan had significantly reduced odds of receiving their planned intervention (OR: 0.34 [95%CI 0.24, 0.48]), and significantly reduced odds of receiving any intervention (OR: 0.51 [95%CI 0.37, 0.72] ), compared to households under the LLIN micro-plan. Comparison between the 2021 and 2018 MIS indicated a 27% reduction in LLIN coverage nationally in 2021, while IRS coverage was similar. Additionally, between 2018 and 2021, there was a 13% increase in households that received neither intervention.

conclusionsThis analysis shows that although the micro-planning strategy adopted in 2020 worked much better for LLIN-assigned areas compared to IRS-assigned areas, there was reduced overall vector control coverage in 2021 compared to 2018 before micro-planning.

Indexed as

InsecticidesInsecticide-Treated BednetsMalariaHumansMosquito ControlZambiaInsecticides

Identifiers

PMID38037072
PMCPMC10688488
OpenAlexW4389204709

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.