ArticleMalaria journal2025
Social and behavioural considerations for responding to Anopheles stephensi in Africa: a scoping review.
Article in Malaria journal, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAnopheles stephensi has been identified in multiple African countries over the past decade. Unlike malaria vectors endemic to Africa, invasive An. stephensi shares characteristics with Aedes aegypti, including laying eggs in artificial containers near human dwellings, particularly in urban areas. These characteristics pose a threat to malaria control and elimination and shape needed interventions, including the role of individuals, households, and communities. Due to the urgency to develop strategies for the African context, this scoping review sought to identify social and behaviour change (SBC) considerations for responding to An. stephensi in Africa, by synthesizing information currently available, leveraging lessons from Anopheles and Aedes control, to inform evidence-based guidance.
methodsThe review included core interventions promoted for malaria (insecticide-treated nets, indoor residual spraying, and care-seeking for fever) and larval source management (LSM) interventions. A systematic search of four online databases (PubMed; EMBASE; Global Health; and Global index medicus) used intervention-specific terms defined a priori. Peer-reviewed articles published from 2000 to 2021, with a description of individual, household, or community behaviour and/or participation in one or more core or LSM interventions were included. For LSM interventions, included articles related to control of malaria and Aedes-borne infections.
resultsOf 3,306 articles screened, 42 met inclusion criteria. Twenty-seven were malaria control studies with two on An. stephensi. Fourteen publications targeted Ae. aegypti and one did not specify vectors. In low transmission contexts, malaria-related prevention behaviours tend to be practiced at lower rates, underscoring the need to address the factors driving these behaviours and effectively tailor SBC to the needs of higher risk groups. It is also critical to create early and meaningful partnerships with affected communities. Finally, highly specific guidance for governments, communities, and households is paramount, particularly for LSM interventions, as missing any specific step in the necessary behaviours for these interventions will reduce their potential effectiveness. DISCUSSION: The dearth of An. stephensi-specific articles underscores the need for further research and documentation as countries respond to the threat. This review highlights the importance of tailoring SBC to groups experiencing higher risk, like those moving between higher and lower transmission areas or working in construction sites. Learnings from Aedes control provides valuable insights into LSM for An. stephensi and opportunities for integrated approaches to SBC, including multi-sectoral collaboration, partnership with community leaders and civil society.
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.