ArticleJournal of medical entomology2024
Physical integrity and bioefficacy of used long-lasting insecticidal nets in Makenene, Centre Region of Cameroon.
Article in Journal of medical entomology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Use and effectiveness of long-lasting insecticide-treated nets (LLINs) in southern Cameroon].Medecine tropicale et sante internationale · 2026Article
- Physical integrity and bioefficacy of long-lasting insecticidal nets 18 months after use among Central African Republic refugees in Gado-Badzere, a high malaria burden camp in Cameroon.Parasite epidemiology and control · 2026Article
- Reduced bioefficacy of used LLINs against natural populations of Anopheles gambiae sensu lato in the centre and east regions of Cameroon.Parasites & vectors · 2026Article
- Malaria transmission, insecticide resistance and efficacy of insecticide-treated nets in Belabo and Ouami, two localities of the East Region of Cameroon.Current research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Long-lasting insecticide nets (LLINs) are the recommended tools against mosquito-borne diseases. However, their physical integrity and bioefficacy in the field could be affected by several factors. This study evaluated the physical integrity and bioefficacy of nets used in Makenene since 2016. Cross-sectional field surveys were carried out after 6 y. A questionnaire was first administered to the heads of households, and then the physical integrity of the LLINs was determined by calculating the proportional hole index (pHI). WHO cone bioassays were conducted to determine the bioefficacy of LLINs currently being used against wild strains of Anopheles gambiae s.l., Culex pipiens s.l., and laboratory-reared pyrethroid-susceptible strain of Anopheles coluzzii (Ngousso). Of the 167 LLINs examined in households, 39.5% were fairly good, 26.4% were acceptable, and 34.1% were damaged. The most torn faces of the nets were the sides used for entering and exiting. None of the 30 LLINs used for WHO cone bioassays was still effective against An. gambiae s.l. and Cx. pipiens s.l. while up to 85.7% of these LLINs were at least effective against the susceptible strain after 24 h, with a significant difference observed when comparing the mortality rates between wild and laboratory-susceptible strain of Anopheles (P-value < 0.01). Anopheles gambiae s.l. were all (100%) identified as An. gambiae s.s. by PCR. The LLINs distributed in Makenene since the 2016 campaign are only effective on susceptible strain and should be replaced for a better control of residual malaria transmission and the nuisance by Culex mosquitoes in the locality.
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.