ReviewMalaria journal2024
A review of selective indoor residual spraying for malaria control.
Review in Malaria journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of time of day and insecticide treatment on the abundance of Culiseta melanura (Diptera: Culicidae) in resting boxes.Journal of medical entomology · 2026Article
- In vitro larvicidal activity of selected azabenzimidazole and diarylquinoline derivatives against Anopheles gambiae and in silico mechanistic analysis.Molecular diversity · 2026Article
- False-positive and false-negative malaria rapid diagnostic test results: evidence from a nationally representative survey of children in Ghana.Malaria journal · 2026Article
- Estimating mosquito bionomics parameters with a hierarchical Bayesian model.Current research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases · 2026Article
- Chikungunya virus: Current situation and future challenges.Biosafety and health · 2025Review
- Improvement to East African style experimental huts allows for more effective evaluation of vector control products for protection against vector-borne diseases.Parasites & vectors · 2025Article
- Article
- Assessments of Anopheles arabiensis behaviour around bed nets using partial adhesive treatments.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Significant variations in tolerance to clothianidin and pirimiphos-methyl in Anopheles gambiae and Anopheles funestus populations during a dramatic malaria resurgence despite sustained indoor residual spraying in Uganda.Parasites & vectors · 2025Article
- Revealing complex mosquito behaviour: a review of current automated video tracking systems suitable for tracking mosquitoes in the field.Parasites & vectors · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIndoor residual spraying (IRS) is one of the most effective malaria control tools. However, its application has become limited to specific contexts due to the increased costs of IRS products and implementation programmes. Selective spraying-selective spray targeted to particular areas/surfaces of dwellings-has been proposed to maintain the malaria control and resistance-management benefits of IRS while decreasing the costs of the intervention.
methodsA literature search was conducted to find (1) studies that assessed the resting behaviour of Anopheles mosquitoes and (2) studies that evaluated the impact of selective spraying on entomological and malaria outcomes. Additional articles were identified through hand searches of all references cited in articles identified through the initial search. A cost model was developed from PMI VectorLink IRS country programmes, and comparative cost analysis reports to describe the overall cost benefits of selective IRS.
resultsIn some studies, there appeared to be a clear resting preference for certain Anopheles species in terms of the height at which they rested. However, for other species, and particularly the major African malaria vectors, a clear resting pattern was not detected. Furthermore, resting behaviour was not measured in a standardized way. For the selective spray studies that were assessed, there was a wide range of spray configurations, which complicates the comparison of methods. Many of these spray techniques were effective and resulted in reported 25-68% cost savings and reduced use of insecticide. The reported cost savings in the literature do not always consider all of the IRS implementation costs. Using the IRS cost model, these savings ranged from 17 to 29% for programs that targeted Anopheles spp. and 18-41% for programmes that targeted Aedes aegypti.
conclusionsResting behaviour is generally measured in a simplistic way; noting the resting spot of mosquitoes in the morning. This is likely an oversimplification, and there is a need for better monitoring of resting mosquitoes. This may improve the target surface for selective spray techniques, which could reduce the cost of IRS while maintaining its effectiveness. Reporting of cost savings should be calculated considering the entire implementation costs, and a cost model was provided for future calculations.
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.