ArticleParasites & vectors2024
Semi-field evaluation of electrocuting eave tubes for the control of endophagic mosquitoes in south-east Tanzania.
Article in Parasites & vectors, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A power analysis framework to aid the design of robust semi-field vector control experiments.Malaria journal · 2025Article
- A shot in the foot: Could chemical control of malaria vectors threaten food security?MalariaWorld journal · 2024Article
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
backgroundEave spaces are major entry points through which malaria vectors enter houses. Interventions that target mosquitoes at the eaves have recently been developed. However, most of these interventions are based on insecticides for which resistance has been reported. Here we evaluated the efficacy of mosquito electrocuting eave tubes (MEETs) against Anopheles gambiae sensu stricto (An. gambiae s.s.) and Anopheles funestus s.s. under semi-field conditions.
methodsExperiments were conducted in two semi-field chambers, each containing one experimental hut. Six electrocuting eave tubes were installed in each hut to assess their impact on laboratory-reared An. gambiae s.s. and An. funestus s.s.. Each species was assessed separately over 10 nights by releasing 200 unfed females per night into each chamber. One volunteer slept in each hut from 7 p.m. to 5 a.m. Mosquitoes were collected indoors and outdoors using mouth and Prokopack aspirators.
resultsThe placement of MEETs significantly reduced the nightly An. gambiae s.s. indoor and outdoor biting, by 21.1% and 37.4%, respectively. Indoor-biting An. funestus s.s. were reduced by 87.5% while outdoor-biting numbers of An. funestus s.s. declined by 10.4%.
conclusionsMEETs represent a promising tool for controlling mosquitoes at the point of house entry. Further validation of their potential under natural field conditions is necessary. Several advantages over insecticide-based eave tubes are indicated and discussed in this article.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.