ArticleAfrican health sciences2024
Estimating the under-five malaria risk in Uganda based on the nearest neighbour matched analysis technique.
Article in African health sciences, 2024. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Malaria still remains a global burden especially in the under-five despite efforts made towards reducing it. The most recommended vector control methods are; use of insecticide treated nets (ITNs) or long lasting insecticide nets (LLINs) and use of indoor residual spraying (IRS). However, these innovations may not have the same effect on malaria risk in the under-five. This study therefore aimed at assessing; the effect of ITNs/LLINs on malaria risk, the effect of IRS on malaria risk, and the effect of ITNs/LLINs on IRS, using nearest neighbours matched analysis. Methods: Nearest neighbour matched analysis was used to match the treated and control units by taking each treated unit and searching for the control unit with the nearest neighbours without replacement. Results: The results revealed a significant and negative effect of ITNs/LLINs and IRS on malaria risk [ATET=-0.05; 95% CI= -0.07 - -0.02] and [ATET=-0.12; 95% CI= -0.15 - -0.09] respectively. It also found a significant and positive effect of ITNs/LLINs on IRS [ATET=0.03; 95% CI= 0.01 - 0.05]. Conclusions: The implementation of policies and programs towards effective use of ITN/LLIN and IRS can reduce the burden of under-five malaria in Uganda.
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.