ArticlePloS one2025
The BiteBarrier transfluthrin emanator demonstrates significant protection against susceptible and resistant malaria and arbovirus vectors in semi-field trials in Tanzania.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Controlling mosquito-borne diseases is becoming increasingly challenging due to factors such as insecticide resistance and shifts in mosquito behavior. The increasing proportion of early evening, morning, and outdoor biting reduces the effectiveness of core interventions like bed nets, which mainly protect people while sleeping indoors. In response, spatial emanators that release volatile active ingredients into the surrounding air to reduce human-vector contact offer a scalable, complementary strategy. This study evaluated the impact of BiteBarrier, a transfluthrin-based spatial emanator, over eight weeks of aging against multiple mosquito species in a semi-field system simulating both indoor and outdoor settings. We assessed the protective efficacy using both landing rate and feeding success methods across five mosquito species, including pyrethroid susceptible Anopheles gambiae sensu stricto (s.s.) and Aedes aegypti; An. gambiae s.s. with knock down resistance (KDR); and pyrethroid resistant An. funestus and Culex quinquefasciatus with upregulation of mixed function oxidases. The results show that the feeding endpoint provides more robust estimates of protective efficacy compared to the landing endpoint. The BiteBarrier provided over 93% (95% CI: 92-93) protection indoors and 80% (95% CI: 78-81) outdoors against mosquito bites and substantial mortality 47% (95% CI: 43-53) indoor and 26% (95% CI: 22-30) outdoors, regardless of mosquito species or resistance status. Overall, the BiteBarrier shows potential as a tool for reducing mosquito bites and vectorial capacity, offering protection over at least eight weeks of use for both indoor and outdoor environments.
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.