ArticleMalaria journal2025
A power analysis framework to aid the design of robust semi-field vector control experiments.
Article in Malaria journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Combining statistical and dynamical modelling to guide the design of cluster randomised trials for malaria.BMJ global health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSemi-field experiments are an efficient way of assessing the impacts of potential new vector control tools (VCTs) before field trials. However, their design is critically important to ensure their results are unbiased and informative. An essential element of the design of semi-field experiments is power analysis, which empowers researchers to ensure that only designs with adequate statistical power are adopted. In this study, a methodology was developed, and its use was demonstrated in a tutorial, to determine the required number of semi-field chambers, sampling frequency and the number of mosquitoes required to achieve sufficient power for evaluating the impact of a single VCT or two in combination.
methodsBy analysing data simulated from a generalized linear mixed-effects model, power was estimated for various experimental designs, including short- (24 h) vs. long-term (3 months) experiments and single vs. combined application of interventions (e.g., insecticide-treated nets combined with pyriproxyfen autodissemination).
resultsAlthough power increased with increasing number of chambers, sampling frequency and the number of mosquitoes, the number of chambers and variance between chambers were the dominant factors determining power relative to all other design choices. High variance between chambers decreased power, highlighting the importance of making conditions similar among chambers, by reducing variation if possible and by rotating variables if not. As compared to a single intervention, an additional intervention required an increase in the number of chambers, while short and long experiments were similar in terms of key aspects such as the number of chambers per treatment.
conclusionDetermining the most efficient experimental design for a semi-field experiment will depend on a balance of design choices and resource constraints. The power analysis framework and tutorial provided here can aid in the robust design of these widely used experiments and ultimately facilitate the development of new vector control tools (VCTs).
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.