ReviewInternational health2026
Adult blackfly (Simulium damnosum s.l.) collection methods: overview and research needs.
Review in International health, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRiver blindness, caused by Onchocerca volvulus and transmitted by Simulium damnosum s.l., requires robust and ethical vector surveillance for its elimination. The human landing catch (HLC) remains the gold standard for collecting blackflies but presents ethical and operational challenges. This review evaluates alternative blackfly collection methods in relation to their effectiveness, consistency, operational feasibility and alignment with a target product profile (TPP) framework for field programmatic use.
methodsFollowing Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines, PubMed, Web of Science, WHO IRIS, Scopus and Google Scholar were searched through June 2024 using terms related to blackfly traps, vector collection and onchocerciasis. Peer-reviewed and selected grey literature in English and French was included. Data were thematically synthesised and grouped by trap type, assessing performance against defined TPP criteria.
resultsFifteen studies met inclusion criteria. The Esperanza window trap (EWT) and host decoy trap (HDT) achieved high catches in some settings, occasionally matching or surpassing HLC performance, though results varied by ecology. Modified HLC methods reduced exposure while maintaining yields but still required human participation.
conclusionsNo single alternative method consistently matched HLC across settings; however, optimized EWT and HDT designs show promise for ethical, effective onchocerciasis surveillance.
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.