Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36879237›Full record

SynthesisMalaria journal2023

Integrated malaria prevention in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

David Musoke, Edwinah Atusingwize, Carol Namata, Rawlance Ndejjo, Rhoda K Wanyenze, Moses R Kamya

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Malaria journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

David MusokeDepartment of Disease Control and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda. dmusoke@musph.ac.ug.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3262-3918
Edwinah AtusingwizeDepartment of Disease Control and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8701-5608
Carol NamataDepartment of Disease Control and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7565-3458
Rawlance NdejjoDepartment of Disease Control and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9263-557X
Rhoda K WanyenzeDepartment of Disease Control and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5864-3314
Moses R KamyaDepartment of Medicine, School of Medicine, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9106-4234

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs many countries aim to eliminate malaria, use of comprehensive approaches targeting the mosquito vector and environment are needed. Integrated malaria prevention advocates the use of several malaria prevention measures holistically at households and in the community. The aim of this systematic review was to collate and summarize the impact of integrated malaria prevention in low- and middle-income countries on malaria burden.

methodsLiterature on integrated malaria prevention, defined as the use of two or more malaria prevention methods holistically, was searched from 1st January 2001 to 31st July 2021. The primary outcome variables were malaria incidence and prevalence, while the secondary outcome measures were human biting and entomological inoculation rates, and mosquito mortality.

resultsA total of 10,931 studies were identified by the search strategy. After screening, 57 articles were included in the review. Studies included cluster randomized controlled trials, longitudinal studies, programme evaluations, experimental hut/houses, and field trials. Various interventions were used, mainly combinations of two or three malaria prevention methods including insecticide-treated nets (ITNs), indoor residual spraying (IRS), topical repellents, insecticide sprays, microbial larvicides, and house improvements including screening, insecticide-treated wall hangings, and screening of eaves. The most common methods used in integrated malaria prevention were ITNs and IRS, followed by ITNs and topical repellents. There was reduced incidence and prevalence of malaria when multiple malaria prevention methods were used compared to single methods. Mosquito human biting and entomological inoculation rates were significantly reduced, and mosquito mortality increased in use of multiple methods compared to single interventions. However, a few studies showed mixed results or no benefits of using multiple methods to prevent malaria.

conclusionUse of multiple malaria prevention methods was effective in reducing malaria infection and mosquito density in comparison with single methods. Results from this systematic review can be used to inform future research, practice, policy and programming for malaria control in endemic countries.

Indexed as

CulicidaeInsecticidesInsect RepellentsAnimalsDeveloping CountriesHumansMosquito VectorsInsecticidesInsect RepellentsIntegrated approachLow- and middle-income countriesMalaria preventionMultiple methods

Identifiers

PMID36879237
PMCPMC9987134

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.