ArticlePLoS computational biology2026
Mobility hinders malaria elimination goals in the Brazilian Amazon.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHuman mobility across the Brazilian Amazon-shaped by frontier development, land-use change, mining activity, and climatic shocks-remains a major barrier to malaria elimination. Brazil aims to eliminate Plasmodium falciparum (Pf) by 2030 and Plasmodium vivax (Pv) by 2035, yet malaria incidence has plateaued since 2020. We quantify parasite-specific mobility and assess how importations drive malaria reintroduction and reestablishment in areas approaching elimination.
methodsWe analyzed 5,521,411 de-identified malaria cases from Sivep-Malaria (2003-2023) across 808 municipalities in the nine-state Brazilian Amazon. We (i) used multivariable monthly sequence analysis to classify "Municipal Malaria Importation Trajectories" (MMITs) using local/imported composition, incidence per 1,000, and source/sink network typologies; (ii) characterized mobility networks by parasite species and locality type (rural, urban, settlement, indigenous, mining); and (iii) developed a parasite-specific rule-based classification procedure to identify reintroduction, and defined reestablishment as sustained local transmission.
resultsSequence analysis produced five MMIT clusters, spanning municipalities nearing elimination to areas with sustained high local transmission and distinct profiles of declining transmission with intense vs. moderate importation. Overall, 959,281 cases (17.38%) were imported. Cases were predominantly Pv (81.68%), with Pf comprising 17.15%; Pf was more common among imported than locally acquired infections. Mobility patterns shifted after mid-2020: by 2023, > 50% of exported cases originated in mining localities despite ~0.2% land coverage, with Pf importation increasingly concentrated in municipalities overlapping the Yanomami Indigenous Land. From 2006-2023, we identified 63 Pf and 221 Pv reintroduced locally acquired cases following ≥3 years of zero local transmission, leading to reestablishment in 6 and 23 municipalities, respectively, and generating 864 subsequent Pf and 6,524 subsequent Pv cases. Post-reintroduction transmission persisted for long periods (mean 762 days for Pf; 815 days for Pv).
conclusionMalaria elimination in Brazil is increasingly hindered by parasite-specific mobility, especially linked to mining-indigenous confluences, and by repeated reintroduction in receptive municipalities nearing elimination (notably along the arc of deforestation). Mobility-informed surveillance and targeted reactive strategies are essential to achieve and sustain Brazil's malaria elimination goals.
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.