ArticlePLoS computational biology2026
Leveraging spatial structure to design spatially-targeted malaria interventions at the community-scale.
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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Progress in malaria control has stagnated since the early 21st century in many countries, requiring new approaches such as the use of spatially-targeted interventions. However, evidence on the effectiveness of spatially-targeted interventions is mixed, depending on both the setting and intervention. In addition, the potential role of community health programs in implementing spatial targeting is underexplored, with models focusing on coarser spatial scales than those needed to guide programmatic activities. We developed a two-age-class, spatially-explicit model of malaria at the community-scale for a district in southeastern Madagascar, accounting for environmental heterogeneity and spatial structure, to explore spatially-targeted community health interventions. The model was fit to field-based case notifications and malaria prevalence data and then used to simulate three interventions: indoor residual spraying (IRS), supplemental coverage of long-lasting insecticide-treated nets (LLIN), and active case detection (ACD). We compared five scenarios, one with no spatial targeting and others targeting communities (i) nearest to clinics, (ii) furthest from clinics, (iii) with highest incidence, and (iv) that are spatially central. The non-targeted intervention was generally the most effective, but the least resource efficient. The second most effective intervention was based on spatial centrality, which reached a larger population while using fewer transportation resources than the non-targeted intervention. No combination of interventions was able to eliminate malaria in the district, although detecting symptomatic cases through ACD could avert 100% of severe malaria cases at high detection rates. These results highlight the potential for targeted malaria interventions, especially in low-income settings, that take into account spatial structure in the human population and transport networks to reduce malaria burdens using fewer resources than conventional district-wide interventions. [A French language abstract is available as Text A in S1 Appendix].
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.