ReviewPLoS neglected tropical diseases2024
Perceived needs of disease vector control programs: A review and synthesis of (sub)national assessments from South Asia and the Middle East.
Review in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances in mosquito gut microbiota: Mechanisms of regulating pathogen transmission and applications in vector control.Virulence · 2026Review
- The Burden of Chikungunya in India: An Overview of Clinical, Epidemiological, and Public Health Challenges.Cureus · 2026Review
- Development and validation of an assessment tool for public health emergency management program.Global health research and policy · 2025Article
- Vector-Borne Disease Control and Management in Irrigation Areas: A Neglected Critical Phenomenon in Malawi.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Article
- Commentary on the Issue ofVeterinary sciences · 2025Article
- Collaborative engagement with vector control stakeholders is key to enhance the utility of vector-borne disease models.Parasites & vectors · 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
26 authors at 17 institutions in 10 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Systems for disease vector control should be effective, efficient, and flexible to be able to tackle contemporary challenges and threats in the control and elimination of vector-borne diseases. As a priority activity towards the strengthening of vector control systems, it has been advocated that countries conduct a vector-control needs assessment. A review was carried out of the perceived needs for disease vector control programs among eleven countries and subnational states in South Asia and the Middle East. In each country or state, independent teams conducted vector control needs assessment with engagement of stakeholders. Important weaknesses were described for malaria, dengue and leishmaniases regarding vector surveillance, insecticide susceptibility testing, monitoring and evaluation of operations, entomological capacity and laboratory infrastructure. In addition, community mobilization and intersectoral collaboration showed important gaps. Countries and states expressed concern about insecticide resistance that could reduce the continued effectiveness of interventions, which demands improved monitoring. Moreover, attainment of disease elimination necessitates enhanced vector surveillance. Vector control needs assessment provided a useful planning tool for systematic strengthening of vector control systems. A limitation in conducting the vector control needs assessment was that it is time- and resource-intensive. To increase the feasibility and utility of national assessments, an abridged version of the guidance should focus on operationally relevant topics of the assessment. Similar reviews are needed in other regions with different contextual conditions.
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.