ArticleParasites & vectors2024
Why does malaria transmission continue at high levels despite universal vector control? Quantifying persistent malaria transmission by Anopheles funestus in Western Province, Zambia.
Article in Parasites & vectors, 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.
- Updating Anopheles funestus group members in Burkina Faso: species distribution and contribution to malaria transmission.Malaria journal · 2026Article
- Outdoor biting by malaria vectors: what are the options for intervention?Malaria journal · 2025Review
- High exposure to malaria vector bites despite high use of bednets in a setting of seasonal malaria in southwestern Mali: the urgent need for outdoor vector control strategies.Parasites & vectors · 2025Article
- Malaria: past, present, and future.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2025Review
- Adjusting vector surveillance for human behaviors reveals Anopheles funestus drove a resurgence in malaria despite IRS with clothianidin in Uganda.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Daytime and public space exposure to Anopheles funestus bites in Western Province, Zambia: implications for malaria surveillance and control.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
24 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSome settings continue to experience a high malaria burden despite scale-up of malaria vector control to high levels of coverage. Characterisation of persistent malaria transmission in the presence of standard control measures, also termed residual malaria transmission, to understand where and when individuals are exposed to vector biting is critical to inform refinement of prevention and control strategies.
methodsSecondary analysis was performed using data collected during a phase III cluster randomized trial of attractive targeted sugar bait stations in Western Province, Zambia. Two seasonal cohorts of children aged 1-14 years were recruited and monitored monthly during the malaria transmission season, concurrent with entomological surveillance using a combination of human landing catch (HLC) and Centres for Disease Control (CDC) light traps at randomly selected households in study clusters. Behavioural data from cohort participants were combined with measured Anopheles funestus landing rates and sporozoite positivity to estimate the human behaviour-adjusted entomological inoculation rate (EIR).
resultsBehavioural data from 1237 children over 5456 child-visits in 20 entomology surveillance clusters were linked with hourly landing rates from 8131 female An. funestus trapped by HLC. Among all An. funestus tested by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), 3.3% were sporozoite-positive. Mean EIR directly measured from HLC was 0.07 infectious bites per person per night (ib/p/n). When accounting for child locations over the evening and night, the mean behaviour-adjusted EIR was 0.02 ib/p/n. Children not sleeping under insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) experienced 13.6 infectious bites per person per 6 month season, 8% of which occurred outdoors, while ITN users received 1.3 infectious bites per person per 6 month season, 86% of which were received outdoors. Sleeping under an ITN can prevent approximately 90% of potential An. funestus bites among children.
conclusionsIn this setting ITNs have a high personal protective efficacy owing to peak An. funestus biting occurring indoors while most individuals are asleep. However, despite high household possession of ITNs (>90%) and high individual use (>70%), children in this setting experience more than one infectious bite per person per 6 month transmission season, sufficient to maintain high malaria transmission and burden. New tools and strategies are required to reduce the malaria burden in such settings.
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.